• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Do You Like My New T-Shirt?

Venator

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
6,494
Location
Lansing area, Michigan, USA
Which were promptly declared as "heretical" by Rome in the later part of the crusades, and completely outlawed during the Inquisition as being "tools of the devil"...

The crusades ALSO gave us the delightfully evil concept of Central Banking, Fractional Reserve Banking, Compounded Interest, and legalized Usury.

The crusades also brought the wonderful practice of child combatants to the West.

And lets not forget the enlightened practice of torching Islamic libraries and universities.

Institutionalize racism, official government-backed anti-Semitism, rape and pillage as officially sanctioned policy, kidnapping and sex-slave trafficking, historical revisionism, and scientifically-designed large-scale propaganda are all some of the profound by-products of the Crusades.

About the only thing good to come out of the Crusades is it gave the Church an "external enemy" to focus on and persecute after the establishment of the Pax Romana in Europe for about 300 years, rather than continuing to kill, rape, rob, and pillage the indigenous tribes of northern and Western Europe and the British Isles.

It wasn't until the Church had given up on trying to hold Jerusalem in the late 1200s/early 1300s that Rome started to turn it's paranoia and hatred of "commoners" back inward upon it's own empire, and started burning, torturing, and stealing the property of "witches". If it hadn't been for the distraction of the Crusades, there might have been three or four times as many women and children killed in the name of "witch hunts"...

Yeah, the Crusades were a real shining example of "Intellectual Advancement"...

And besides, the Templars weren't "Infidels". They were "believers", just not Muslims. To the Muslims, the Templars were fellow believers--they just happened to be geopolitical enemies.

However, the Templars WERE perhaps the most evil group in the socio-economic history of the West, because they established the first central banks, standardized the practice of fractional reserve banking, and somehow managed to convince Rome that Usery was acceptable. They were the "prototype" for modern economic blood-suckers like Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase.
After reading your post I see that not much has changed in the last 1000 or so years.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,525
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Repeal the 14th? Tell me how that works out.

There is a move afoot (reported on Fox News today) to repeal only that portion of the 14A that makes all born in the US citizens--not the whole 14A. At one point in time, that provision was needed so that States could not deny citizenship (or create special classes of citizenship) for former slaves. Since we no longer have such a dilemma, I favor changing the standard for citizenship by birth to those born in America to at least one biological parent who is currently lawfully present in the US or a US citizen.

Any such change would not affect the citizenship of anyone born in the US prior to its taking effect. Any attempt to remove citizenship from someone based on such an amendment would immediately be struck down by the courts.
 

simmonsjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,662
Location
Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
Nope. Didn't know and don't care. Religion has nothing to do with my statements. Three years of experience in Iraq and the Middle East has everything to do with it. Hate and racism is RAMPANT there. Nothing personal against you Joe, so please don't take it that way. It is what it is.

As a Muslim, you must know what the word KAFIR means. I was called this at least once everyday for three years while in theater and even while I was on vacation in Dubai and Kuwait City. Just in case you don't know the term, here is the translation from Wikipedia:

Kafir (Arabic: كافر kāfir; plural كفّار kuffār) is a term used in a Islamic doctrinal sense, usually translated as "unbeliever" or "disbeliever", or sometimes "infidel". The term refers to a person who rejects God or who hides, denies, or "covers" the truth. The Quran also uses the word for Muslims; in Sura 2 Verse 256, it asks them to take upon themselves the action of "Kofr" of all unjust idols, persons or powers.
In recent times, the Arabic term used as a loanword in English is seen as derogatory, which is why some Muslim scholars discourage its use and suggest the term "non-Muslim" instead.[1]

The word kaffir, sometimes spelled kaffer or kafir, is an offensive term for a black person, most common in South Africa and other African countries. Generally considered a racial or ethnic slur in modern usage, it was previously a neutral term for black southern African people.
The original meaning of the word is 'heathen', 'unbeliever' or 'infidel', from the Arabic 'kafir' and is still being used with this meaning by Muslims.[1] The Arabic term Kafir (arab كافر) is, however, also applied to simply anyone who is not a Muslim. Portuguese explorers used the term generally to describe tribes they encountered in southern Africa, probably having misunderstood its etymology from Muslim traders along the coast. European colonists subsequently continued its use.[2] Although it was in wide use between the 16th and 19th centuries, and not generally seen as an offensive term, as racial tensions increased in 20th century South Africa and the surrounding countries, it became a term of abuse.
The word was used in English, Dutch and, later, Afrikaans, from the 16th century to the early 20th century as a general term for several different peoples of southern Africa. In Portuguese the equivalent cafre was used.
In South Africa today, the term is used both as an insult, and by some, as a common word for a black person. In any case, the term is regarded by most as derogatory (in the same way as "nigger" in other countries). Use of the word has been actionable in South African courts since at least 1976 under the offense of crimen injuria: "the unlawful, intentional and serious violation of the dignity of another".[3]

This is mostly correct, and why I really hate the term Infidel being used as it is. The term Kafir does mean unbeliever. (not disbeliever) It is more specifically someone who has accepted the reality of one God, and then rejected him.(This specific action is called shirk) (specific note here is that you had to of ACCEPTED him first.) Please make note, it has nothing to do with denominations. The Qu'ran speaks to all believers, whether they are Christian or whatnot is irrelevant. Islam is a state of being. Remember Jesus was a Jew, and 'Christianity' didn't arrive until well after his death.

The only act that is damning is Shirk. Being a Christian or a Jew is not Shirk. Many people try and justify that you must accept Mohommad as a prophet. There is no evidence to support this. One thing often overlooked is that the Qu'ran speaks to the 'people of the book.' This refers to Christians, Jews, and Muslims among others. It even refers to the 'religions of Dawud (DAVID)' (If you look at some of the older Mosque architecture, you will find The Star of David incorporated occasionally.)

yes Christians and Jews are commonly called Infidels as a derogatory slang. That doesn't make it true! I understand the desire to adopt it for yourself, as a mark of defiant pride, similar to the way 'nigger' has been adopted here in America. I don't like the idea. I don't think the N-word is appropriate for anyone.

So I reiterate, Christians and Jews are believers and cannot be true Infidels.

So I guess the reason it pisses me off is because it is being used improperly and that is offensive to me. That goes for both the people yelling it and the people putting it on a T-shirt. On further reflection I find the adoption of the word as your own the much less offensive of the two, and a rather understandable desire.

I'm not sure most non-American Muslims can comprehend that as well, though. It probably offends them greatly, both the good and the bad.

PS - The racism IS out of control!
 
Last edited:

VFORVENDETTA

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
222
Location
Death Valley, Nevada, Utah, Idaho
This is mostly correct, and why I really hate the term Infidel being used as it is. The term Kafir does mean unbeliever. (not disbeliever) It is more specifically someone who has accepted the reality of one God, and then rejected him.(This specific action is called shirk) (specific note here is that you had to of ACCEPTED him first.) Please make note, it has nothing to do with denominations. The Qu'ran speaks to all believers, whether they are Christian or whatnot is irrelevant. Islam is a state of being. Remember Jesus was a Jew, and 'Christianity' didn't arrive until well after his death.

The only act that is damning is Shirk. Being a Christian or a Jew is not Shirk. Many people try and justify that you must accept Mohommad as a prophet. There is no evidence to support this. One thing often overlooked is that the Qu'ran speaks to the 'people of the book.' This refers to Christians, Jews, and Muslims among others. It even refers to the 'religions of Dawud (DAVID)' (If you look at some of the older Mosque architecture, you will find The Star of David incorporated occasionally.)

yes Christians and Jews are commonly called Infidels as a derogatory slang. That doesn't make it true! I understand the desire to adopt it for yourself, as a mark of defiant pride, similar to the way 'nigger' has been adopted here in America. I don't like the idea. I don't think the N-word is appropriate for anyone.

So I reiterate, Christians and Jews are believers and cannot be Infidels.

They are infidels in the eyes of your king osama, muhammed and abraham.
 

ODA 226

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
1,603
Location
Etzenricht, Germany
I understand the desire to adopt it for yourself, as a mark of defiant pride, similar to the way 'nigger' has been adopted here in America. I don't like the idea. I don't think the N-word is appropriate for anyone.

Joe,
I never called myself an Infidel but have been called both an Infidel and a Kafir by Muslims on many, many occasions.
Craig
 
Last edited:

VFORVENDETTA

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
222
Location
Death Valley, Nevada, Utah, Idaho
Or Chappelle.

Ahhh... the nation of islam
Noted current and former members and associates of Nation of Islam
Elijah Muhammad
Louis Farrakhan
Khalid Abdul Muhammad
Khadijah Farrakhan
Malcolm X - Later converted to Sunni Islam
Muhammad Ali - Later converted to Sunni Islam [33]
Warith Deen Mohammed - Later converted to Sunni Islam
MC Ren - Later converted to Islam [34]
Ice Cube - Was associated with the Nation of Islam, but never a regular member and simply claims to be Muslim [35]
KAM- member of the Nation Of Islam and former associate of Ice Cube
John Allen Muhammad - The Beltway Sniper, Gulf war veteran, former NOI member[36]
Benjamin Chavis Muhammad
JT The Bigga Figga
Paris
Kemi Seba
 

simmonsjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,662
Location
Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
Lets get something straight here.

Ahhh... the nation of islam
Noted current and former members and associates of Nation of Islam
Elijah Muhammad
Louis Farrakhan
Khalid Abdul Muhammad
Khadijah Farrakhan
Malcolm X - Later converted to Sunni Islam
Muhammad Ali - Later converted to Sunni Islam [33]
Warith Deen Mohammed - Later converted to Sunni Islam
MC Ren - Later converted to Islam [34]
Ice Cube - Was associated with the Nation of Islam, but never a regular member and simply claims to be Muslim [35]
KAM- member of the Nation Of Islam and former associate of Ice Cube
John Allen Muhammad - The Beltway Sniper, Gulf war veteran, former NOI member[36]
Benjamin Chavis Muhammad
JT The Bigga Figga
Paris
Kemi Seba
The 'Nation of Islam' has nothing to do with Islam. Screw those racist pieces of ****. They are little more than a black supremacy group. **** Elijah Poole. I sincerely believe he had Malcolm X killed for converting to Sunni Islam and denouncing racism. Many Muslims I know believe this as well. Those who fled 'the nation' and became Sunni did so because they realized Elijah Poole was a lying racist piece of ****. Those who stayed knew that all along.

Surprisingly they are still around and somewhat active. 7 years ago, when I was at VCU, there were 4 of them outside the commons, spouting off racist remarks and trying to browbeat and recruit African Americans(and only those who were dark skinned). The college was afraid of stopping them because they were a 'religious group.' So myself along with 7-8 other members of the Muslim Student Association went out there and ran them off. Physically. And yes there was applause.
(hey eye95, I forgot about this. Does it count as more than just defending Islam?)

They had a so-called 'mosque' in Richmond. I remember driving by and parking to take a look at it. I was there less than 5 minutes When I saw them dealing crack out the front door. This explains some of the literature of theirs I've read. It is whack.
 
Last edited:

orion8

New member
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
4
Location
Northwest Indiana, ,
Wow, I'm not even sure how to respond to this one. I don't know which is worse. The fact that your wearing a t shirt that by it's very nature is designed to be offensive (thanks for helping us win the hearts and minds by the way), or the fact that you know so little about the carnage and long lasting consequences of the crusades to the relations of both the the Greek Orthodox Church, The RCC , and the Islamic world that you would try to imply the crusades were a good thing. Jews, Muslims, and Christians all suffered purges, rapes, pillaging, and murder on all sides. To be more vivvid for you: picture entire cities being burned to the ground and extermination of entire populaces. Extremists have already tried to portray Americans as crusaders that want to dominate Islam and it's crap like this that helps them gain recruits. I'll bet they'll put you on the cover of their recruiting phamplets.

I'll gladly give you the benefit of the doubt that you just don't realize what your saying by wearing such a t shirt and assume your not just trying to gain attention. I just hope this topic doesn't scare off supportive members who may very happen to be muslim. Muslims tend to react the same to the word Crusade as we do when we hear the word Jihad. I doubt you'd be too keen on someone walking around with shirt that implied support for Jihad.

I strongly urge that admin to remove this photos before we lose any members that would otherwise have supported this open carry.

What about that shirt implies the crusades were a good thing? I think you're making quite a few assumptions here. Its the free expression of one person, judging from your last statement you have a problem with free expression.
 

END_THE_FED

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
926
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
There is a move afoot (reported on Fox News today) to repeal only that portion of the 14A that makes all born in the US citizens--not the whole 14A. At one point in time, that provision was needed so that States could not deny citizenship (or create special classes of citizenship) for former slaves. Since we no longer have such a dilemma, I favor changing the standard for citizenship by birth to those born in America to at least one biological parent who is currently lawfully present in the US or a US citizen.

Any such change would not affect the citizenship of anyone born in the US prior to its taking effect. Any attempt to remove citizenship from someone based on such an amendment would immediately be struck down by the courts.


Actually the 14th amendment does not give citizenship to everyone born in the U.S.

It says:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."

People who are not citizens of this country are not subject to our jurisdiction. They are subject to the jurisdiction of the country of which they are a citizen.

Our central government currently automatically naturalizes anyone born here, but that was not the intent of the amendment. It was specifically for descendants of slaves.
They were subject to the jurisdiction of no country other then the U.S.

The amendment didn't apply to the Native American tribes because they were considered sovereign nations and thus not under the jurisdiction of the U.S.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,525
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
What about that shirt implies the crusades were a good thing? I think you're making quite a few assumptions here. Its the free expression of one person, judging from your last statement you have a problem with free expression.

The Crusades were part of an ongoing invasion/counter-invasion war between Christianity and Islam that, thankfully, ended with the Muslim invaders being pushed back from most of Europe. Of course, that struggle is not over yet.

The Crusades are proof of neither the goodness nor the evil of the Europeans in the Middle Ages. They are proof of a war between Christians and Muslims for domination of the known civilized world.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,525
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Actually the 14th amendment does not give citizenship to everyone born in the U.S.

It says:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." Everyone in the US is subject to the jurisdiction thereof. Anyone who thinks they are not should rob a bank in the US and see who jurisdicts all over his butt.

People who are not citizens of this country are not subject to our jurisdiction. They are subject to the jurisdiction of the country of which they are a citizen. They are subject to the jurisdiction of any country that can get their hands on them.

Our central government currently automatically naturalizes anyone born here, but that was not the intent of the amendment. It was specifically for descendants of slaves. Agreed on the intent part. That was one of the major points of my post.

They were subject to the jurisdiction of no country other then the U.S. Again, because they were physically here. Those who escaped to Canada became subject to the jurisdiction of Canada.

The amendment didn't apply to the Native American tribes because they were considered sovereign nations and thus not under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Indians born within the US may claim US citizenship. Those born within the physical boundaries of an Indian nation cannot use that clause of the 14th to claim citizenship. That is not to say that they may not claim citizenship in some other way.

Once again, any Indian within the boundaries of the US is subject to its jurisdiction.

My point-by-point answers are in blue.
 

END_THE_FED

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
926
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
My point-by-point answers are in blue.


In the clause the term "jurisdiction" was meant as Ties/Allegiances/Loyalties.

I am having trouble finding the website that had some speeches and debates from the men who authored the clause. I am at work now, I think I have it bookmarked at home ill check when I get there.
 
Top