Re: OT: How Muslims and Americans think differently

On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 07:30:55 -0800, larry moe 'n curly wrote:
[color=blue]
> Is it always wrong to kill innocent civilians?
>
> 46% of Americans say it is.
>
> 70-80% of the savages in several predominantly Muslim Middle and Near
> East countries say it is.[/color]


You're kidding, right? Look up Jihad.

Hachiroku ãƒ?ãƒ?ãƒ*ク wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 07:30:55 -0800, larry moe 'n curly wrote:
>[color=green]
> > Is it always wrong to kill innocent civilians?
> >
> > 46% of Americans say it is.
> >
> > 70-80% of the savages in several predominantly Muslim Middle and Near
> > East countries say it is.[/color]
>
> You're kidding, right?[/color]

I'm not, and it seems to be a legitimate poll from an unbiased
organization.
[color=blue]
> Look up Jihad.[/color]

Is it like a crusade?

On 27 Feb 2007 13:33:55 -0800, "larry moe 'n curly"
<larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>I'm not, and it seems to be a legitimate poll from an unbiased
>organization.[/color]


There is NO SUCH THING....

Read any of the poll questions to prove I'm right....

--


Scott in Florida

Dude, you can't even remember the source (some blog?) and yet you say
"it *seems* a legitimate poll from an unbiased organization"?

What's your day job, reading palms? Selling used cars? Pollster for
the DNC? Global warming expert?


On Feb 27, 4:33Â*pm, "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencu...@my-deja.com>
wrote:[color=blue]
> Hachiroku ãƒ?ãƒ?ãƒ*ク wrote:[color=green]
> > On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 07:30:55 -0800, larry moe 'n curly wrote:[/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Is it always wrong to kill innocent civilians?[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > 46% of Americans say it is.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > 70-80% of the savages in several predominantly Muslim Middle and Near
> > > East countries say it is.[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> > You're kidding, right?[/color]
>
> I'm not, and it seems to be a legitimate poll from an unbiased
> organization.
>[color=green]
> > Look up Jihad.[/color]
>
> Is it like a crusade?[/color]

"Mark" <bogusmailmark@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1172613021.433921.203730@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com...[color=blue]
>Dude, you can't even remember the source (some blog?) and yet you say
>"it *seems* a legitimate poll from an unbiased organization"?[/color]


If someone reads something a month ago in the newspaper, is it invalid if he
can't provide a web link to the story? Consider your answer very carefully.

On 27 Feb 2007 13:50:31 -0800, "Mark" <bogusmailmark@yahoo.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Dude, you can't even remember the source (some blog?) and yet you say
>"it *seems* a legitimate poll from an unbiased organization"?
>
>What's your day job, reading palms? Selling used cars? Pollster for
>the DNC? Global warming expert?[/color]

ROFL...

That thought crossed my mind..

'I know I saw it somewhere...'

LOL

[color=blue]
>
>
>On Feb 27, 4:33*pm, "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencu...@my-deja.com>
>wrote:[color=green]
>> Hachiroku ???? wrote:[color=darkred]
>> > On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 07:30:55 -0800, larry moe 'n curly wrote:[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> > > Is it always wrong to kill innocent civilians?[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> > > 46% of Americans say it is.[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> > > 70-80% of the savages in several predominantly Muslim Middle and Near
>> > > East countries say it is.[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> > You're kidding, right?[/color]
>>
>> I'm not, and it seems to be a legitimate poll from an unbiased
>> organization.
>>[color=darkred]
>> > Look up Jihad.[/color]
>>
>> Is it like a crusade?[/color]
>[/color]
--


Scott in Florida

"Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
news:j3a9u21s7r6fh0aoljksse43f524eufmki@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On 27 Feb 2007 13:50:31 -0800, "Mark" <bogusmailmark@yahoo.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>Dude, you can't even remember the source (some blog?) and yet you say
>>"it *seems* a legitimate poll from an unbiased organization"?
>>
>>What's your day job, reading palms? Selling used cars? Pollster for
>>the DNC? Global warming expert?[/color]
>
> ROFL...
>
> That thought crossed my mind..[/color]

At least it didn't have to cross very far.

You believe that anything learned before the world wide web existed is lost
knowledge, and totally invalid.

Mark wrote:[color=blue]
>
> On Feb 27, 4:33Â*pm, "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencu...@my-deja.com>
> wrote:[color=green]
> > Hachiroku ãƒ?ãƒ?ãƒ*ク wrote:[color=darkred]
> > > On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 07:30:55 -0800, larry moe 'n curly wrote:[/color]
> >[color=darkred]
> > > > Is it always wrong to kill innocent civilians?[/color]
> >[color=darkred]
> > > > 46% of Americans say it is.[/color]
> >[color=darkred]
> > > > 70-80% of the savages in several predominantly Muslim Middle and Near
> > > > East countries say it is.[/color]
> >[color=darkred]
> > > You're kidding, right?[/color]
> >
> > I'm not, and it seems to be a legitimate poll from an unbiased
> > organization.[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
> Dude, you can't even remember the source (some blog?) and yet you say
> "it *seems* a legitimate poll from an unbiased organization"?[/color]

I always try to check the legitimacy of any pollsters because so many
are rigged (remember the one a few weeks ago that asked if we wanted
to win in Iraq, but it was from a "strategic communications" company,
AKA propaganda mill?), and at the time I checked the poll sponsor, it
showed no association with any biased groups. I've looked through my
browser history but can no longer find anything related to this poll.
[color=blue]
> What's your day job, reading palms? Selling used cars? Pollster for
> the DNC? Global warming expert?[/color]

I'm an independent with no associations to the DNC or RNC and have
alway dismissed polls from partisan groups.

Scott in Florida wrote:
[color=blue]
> On 27 Feb 2007 13:50:31 -0800, "Mark" <bogusmailmark@yahoo.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
> >Dude, you can't even remember the source (some blog?) and yet you say
> >"it *seems* a legitimate poll from an unbiased organization"?
> >
> >What's your day job, reading palms? Selling used cars? Pollster for
> >the DNC? Global warming expert?[/color]
>
> ROFL...
>
> That thought crossed my mind..
>
> 'I know I saw it somewhere...'[/color]

You've made the wild claim that Rush Limbaugh was shown to be accurate
with his facts 98.x% of the time, but you never provided any citation.

Scott in Florida wrote:
[color=blue]
> On 27 Feb 2007 13:50:31 -0800, "Mark" <bogusmailmark@yahoo.com> wrote:[/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
> > Is it always wrong to kill innocent civilians?
> >
> > 46% of Americans say it is.
> >
> > 70-80% of the savages in several predominantly Muslim Middle and Near
> > East countries say it is.[/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > >Dude, you can't even remember the source (some blog?) and yet you say
> > >"it *seems* a legitimate poll from an unbiased organization"?[/color]
> >
> >What's your day job, reading palms? Selling used cars? Pollster for
> >the DNC? Global warming expert?[/color]
>
> ROFL...
>
> That thought crossed my mind..
>
> 'I know I saw it somewhere...'
>
> LOL[/color]

It turns out that I did because DH provided the link to the article
that quoted the poll:

[url]www.csmonitor.com/2007/0223/p09s01-coop.html[/url]

OTOH you still haven't provided any proof that Rush Limbaugh gets his
facts right 98.x% of the time.

In article <1172663348.028625.167500@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>,
"larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Scott in Florida wrote:
>[color=green]
> > On 27 Feb 2007 13:50:31 -0800, "Mark" <bogusmailmark@yahoo.com> wrote:[/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Is it always wrong to kill innocent civilians?
> > >
> > > 46% of Americans say it is.
> > >
> > > 70-80% of the savages in several predominantly Muslim Middle and Near
> > > East countries say it is.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > >Dude, you can't even remember the source (some blog?) and yet you say
> > > >"it *seems* a legitimate poll from an unbiased organization"?
> > >
> > >What's your day job, reading palms? Selling used cars? Pollster for
> > >the DNC? Global warming expert?[/color]
> >
> > ROFL...
> >
> > That thought crossed my mind..
> >
> > 'I know I saw it somewhere...'
> >
> > LOL[/color]
>
> It turns out that I did because DH provided the link to the article
> that quoted the poll:
>
> [url]www.csmonitor.com/2007/0223/p09s01-coop.html[/url]
>
> OTOH you still haven't provided any proof that Rush Limbaugh gets his
> facts right 98.x% of the time.[/color]

It's true. You didn't know that fact?
--

Sigh... It's hard to decide if you some of you Dims are intentionally
dishonest, or just dumber than your average doorknob.

The Muslim part of the "survey" was conducted by Terror Free Tomorrow,
a group led by Ken Ballen, former Democratic counsel to the House
Government Reform and Oversight Committee, hardly an *unbiased*
organization. In other words, the poll consisted of habitual liars
responding to vague questions from people with biased outlooks and
questionable motives.

Here's some interesting commentary from Hugh Fitzgerald:

Spin Doctor for Islam

One would like to know who is behind, who pays for, not directly but
indirectly, for this group "Terror Free Tomorrow," and just who this
Ken Ballen, both silly and sinister in his pronouncements, in the
sloppiness of his "questions" -- what is the definition of a
"civilian" to Muslims who were queried? To the most important Sunni
writer today, Al-Qaradawi, even Israeli fetuses inside their mothers
are fair game, are not considered "innocent civilians," because, as Al-
Qaradawi put it, they can grow up to be "Israeli soldiers." Much the
same sentiments have been echoed all over the Muslim world, and the
distinction we make between soldiers and civilians, it should be
obvious from the observable behavior, over decades, of Arab and Muslim
terrorist groups that do not make similar distinctions and yet are
wildly popular for their actions, are not made by Muslims.

Yet this Ken Baller thinks he can ask questions about the propriety of
attacks on "civilians" or "innocent civilians" without any discussion
or further inquiry or attempt to fix exactly what Muslims take those
phrases to mean.

Either he is willfully ignorant, or incredibly stupid, or merely one
more Western hireling of the vast Arab and Muslim campaign, all over
the Western world, to render Infidels less wary, less suspicious,and
to delay the day of widespread understanding of the clear doctrines of
Islam -- easily discoverable in the texts, the Qur'an and Hadith and
Sira (one wishes to know what Ken Ballen has read, what he himself
knows of those texts and what he makes of them, what significance he
attributes to them), and easily observed in the recorded behavior of
Muslims, over the past 1350 years of Jihad-conquest and subsequent
subjugation of non-Muslims, offered conversion, death, or the
permanent status as dhimmis, as their only possibilities. Does Ken
Ballen know this? Does he know that more and more Infidels are
learning about this, and having been exposed to every conceivable kind
of evasion, taqiyya-and-tu-quoque, jimmying of the data, stacking of
the questionnaire deck, and then the "analysis" that sounds as though
it came from an office of CAIR, or some place in Riyadh, that people
are getting fed up -- with the likes of all those who make up that
army of hirelings, while our own servicemen are forced to risk their
lives for polices made by people who, by and large, do not understand
the full menace of Islam, nor the many instruments of Jihad, and
especially those of Da'wa, demographic conquest, and the propaganda
directed at Infidels that makes those continuing and blatant campaigns
of Da'wa and demographic conquest possible without a coherent
opposition.

Ken Ballen needs to be examined, and above all - those who constructed
those transparently-worded questions to achieve the desired result,
and those who have paid him or are paying for this "Terror Free
Tomorrow" program, need to be looked into by the security services.
Let us know all about Ken Ballen, and "Terror Free Tomorrow." It will
be interesting to find out a bit more, won't it?





On Feb 28, 6:55 am, "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencu...@my-deja.com>
wrote:[color=blue]
> Evil top poster Mark wrote:
>[color=green]
> > On Feb 27, 4:33 pm, "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencu...@my-deja.com>
> > wrote:[color=darkred]
> > > Is it always wrong to kill innocent civilians?[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > 46% of Americans say it is.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > 70-80% of the savages in several predominantly Muslim Middle and Near
> > > East countries say it is.[/color]
> > Dude, you can't even remember the source (some blog?) and yet you say
> > "it *seems* a legitimate poll from an unbiased organization"?[/color]
>
> DH provided the link to the article that quoted the poll done by the
> U. of Maryland's Program on International Public Attitudes:
>
> [url]www.csmonitor.com/2007/0223/p09s01-coop.html[/url]
>
> I'm sorry I couldn't cite that in my original message.[/color]

On 28 Feb 2007 03:20:21 -0800, "larry moe 'n curly"
<larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>Scott in Florida wrote:
>[color=green]
>> On 27 Feb 2007 13:50:31 -0800, "Mark" <bogusmailmark@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>> >Dude, you can't even remember the source (some blog?) and yet you say
>> >"it *seems* a legitimate poll from an unbiased organization"?
>> >
>> >What's your day job, reading palms? Selling used cars? Pollster for
>> >the DNC? Global warming expert?[/color]
>>
>> ROFL...
>>
>> That thought crossed my mind..
>>
>> 'I know I saw it somewhere...'[/color]
>
>You've made the wild claim that Rush Limbaugh was shown to be accurate
>with his facts 98.x% of the time, but you never provided any citation.[/color]

Go to his site and read up on the organization that audits him.

--


Scott in Florida

On 28 Feb 2007 03:55:25 -0800, "larry moe 'n curly"
<larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>Evil top poster Mark wrote:
>[color=green]
>> On Feb 27, 4:33 pm, "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencu...@my-deja.com>
>> wrote:[/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > Is it always wrong to kill innocent civilians?
>> >
>> > 46% of Americans say it is.
>> >
>> > 70-80% of the savages in several predominantly Muslim Middle and Near
>> > East countries say it is.[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
>> Dude, you can't even remember the source (some blog?) and yet you say
>> "it *seems* a legitimate poll from an unbiased organization"?[/color]
>
>DH provided the link to the article that quoted the poll done by the
>U. of Maryland's Program on International Public Attitudes:
>
> [url]www.csmonitor.com/2007/0223/p09s01-coop.html[/url]
>
>I'm sorry I couldn't cite that in my original message.[/color]

CSM?

ROFLMAO

Now that is an unbiased source.

--


Scott in Florida

"Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
news:md7bu2l53g4d4kpgtn5e3hccqfuqjrpjjb@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On 28 Feb 2007 03:20:21 -0800, "larry moe 'n curly"
> <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>
>>Scott in Florida wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> On 27 Feb 2007 13:50:31 -0800, "Mark" <bogusmailmark@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Dude, you can't even remember the source (some blog?) and yet you say
>>> >"it *seems* a legitimate poll from an unbiased organization"?
>>> >
>>> >What's your day job, reading palms? Selling used cars? Pollster for
>>> >the DNC? Global warming expert?
>>>
>>> ROFL...
>>>
>>> That thought crossed my mind..
>>>
>>> 'I know I saw it somewhere...'[/color]
>>
>>You've made the wild claim that Rush Limbaugh was shown to be accurate
>>with his facts 98.x% of the time, but you never provided any citation.[/color]
>
> Go to his site and read up on the organization that audits him.
> Scott in Florida[/color]


Now we know where you get your marching orders from.