Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve harris who wrote (222765)	3/6/2007 7:54:05 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

That India is not the "West" is irrelevant. Hindus are far far closer to the Islamic concept of infidels than Westerners who are predominantly Christian and therefore a recognized and protected people ("People of Book). So far from being able to dodge the issue by appeal to geography, there is an even stronger case to be made: WHY DID THE MUSLIMS NOT GO ON A KILLING RAMPAGE OF HINDUS WHO ACCORDING TO ISLAM ARE BELIEVERS IN FALSE GODS? If you can't make your case for that, then you are so much worse off trying to make the case they Muslims want to kill followers of a recognized religion, namely Christians.

To: steve harris who wrote (222765)	3/7/2007 2:47:13 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Fortunately, 1500 years ago, Mohammed was limited how far he could travel on a horse. Dude, I think you mean camel.....

To: steve harris who wrote (222765)	3/8/2007 2:21:08 AM
From: Proud Deplorable	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

"Mohammed having a nuke is no different than Iran having a nuke." Would Jesus have a nuke? No? Then I guess God is not on the side of the USA since they have nukes. Answer me, would Jesus have nukes? Most so called Christians seem to think its OK for the USA to have them and to take over the world. There are no worse hypocrites in the name of God than Christians