-------------------- "And in the end, the love we take will be equal to the love we make." ~The Beatles~ Posts: 895 | From: Atlanta, GA. | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sin-dee: Morgan, you are a trip!!!
Oh, I thought she was a strip! Morgan, you have to work on some of your stretch marks, dear.
Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Every morning is a fresh beginning. Every day is the world made new. Today is a new day. Today is my world made new. I have lived all my life up to this moment, to come to this day. This moment - this day - is as good as any moment in all eternity. Posts: 224 | From: england | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
the question is, which photos are more disgusting? Now I understand why the scotts are so into haggis.
Posts: 1161 | From: wo xiang xiao bian ji si le | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hereby declare that I do not indeed need a hijab not to wear underwear. Posts: 2238 | From: Mother Earth | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I want to ask a serious question: do those Scotts really have nothing underneath??? It seems like really asking for trouble, or at least indecent exposure... I thought at first those pictures were somehow fabricated but I have seen just too many of them depicting... the lack of modesty. Posts: 2238 | From: Mother Earth | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
When I do dump this DH of mine I'll stick with the Americans.
Oh my goodness those men really do need to cover up, now I know why nature chose to give the UK so many cloudy days. Imagine if the sun reflected off of one of those arses. It would blind you in two ways! Posts: 5744 | From: Minneapolis, Mn USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fitzgerald: Why the Copts are so upset The Vice President of the Jihad Watch Board of Directors, Hugh Fitzgerald, observes that the reaction of the Coptic community in America to the murders of the Armanious family is extremely telling in itself:
Surely what is of note in this case is that the Copts in Jersey City seem to have little doubt as to who carried out, or was behind, the murder. Consider the fury expressed against Muslims and against Islam at the funeral, a fury heightened by what the Copts in attendance took to be a transparent attempt by one Muslim cleric to make an appearance not out of any real sympathy, but only, the Copts believed, to shore up the Muslim position with the American media. That suspicion, that fury, tells us a good deal about what the Copts must have suffered at the hands of Muslims, in Egypt and even here. And that remains true, no matter who committed the murder, though we are entitled to speculate reasonably. If the Louvre were bombed tomorrow, it would -- given what we know about the Islamic attitude toward almost all art, reasonably believe that Muslims were behind it, even if in the end it turned out to be someone else.
Furthermore, the statements quoted in the press by Muslims in Jersey City are entirely full of self-pity ("Why does everyone blame us?" "We are 'sick of this crap' about Islam") and noticeably devoid of any expressed pity for the murdered family of Copts.
Finally, one can find expressions of satisfaction about the murder at Muslim websites about the murder. Those remarks should not be forgotten.
All of these -- the suspicions of the Copts, based on their felt history of persecution, and their belief that Muslims are quite capable of such actions (now, where would they get such ideas, if not from their entire life experience?), and the behavior of Muslim neighbors devoid of sympathy, and of other Muslims crowing at the event -- remain true no matter who committed the murders.
But the point remains: the father and the older daughter were too proud, too unapologetic, too enthusiastic, about their Christian beliefs, and this infuriated Muslims who believe that once a dhimmi, always a dhimmi (one wonders about the Chaldean Christians out in Dearborn, as they worry over their relatives subject to Muslim attack in Iraq). It is hardly unreasonable to conclude, at this point, that it was for that they were killed. And if it should prove otherwise, there is still this matter of how the Copts have reacted, and how the Muslims have also. Both reactions tell us a good deal.
If The New York Times and the rest of the media would give greater attention to this story, and at least try to make people understand why the Copts in Jersey City have no doubts about who committed the crime, by finding out what it is in the experience of those Copts that makes them come to that conclusion, instead of vague allusions to "communal strife" and so on -- if, in other words, the persecution of the Copts in the land of which they are the descendants of the original inhabitants, and not those who call themselves Muslim Arabs (most of whom, no doubt, are themselves the descendants of Copts as well, if they only realized it, their ancestors over the centuries having concluded that it was easier to convert ("revert") to Islam.
More seriousness please, less frivolity by the media. Less about the Armani fashion empire, more about the Armanious family murder, is called for.
Any attempt to "insabbiare" (sand over) the results of the investigation will not work for this case. Nor would it something to be forgotten or overlooked. It would be likely, in fact, to get more and more attention, and to become a "teaching moment" on the inculcated murderous hostility that can be found in many passages in Qur'an and Hadith. If the police in Jersey City are unaware of those passages, they -- and the police everywhere in the West, as well as the other security services -- need to learn about what Islam teaches. Repetition of pious phrases, pretense that it is only a "handful of crazies," (akin to those Muslims who think that by constantly repeating that no Muslims cheered on the afternoon of September 11, we will simply forget the reports from Cairo, from Baghdad, from Riyadh and Jeddah, from Ramallah and Nablus and Gaza, from Amman, even from Hamza Street in Beirut -- not to mention the reports from Pakistan, Indonesia, indeed everywhere except, of course, Tehran, where many are now heartily sick of the mullahs, and the Islamic Republic for which they stand), is accompanied by continued seeming unawareness of why it would be perfectly plausible that, for the sins of having promoted Christianity, the Armanious family would be killed.
Still more disturbing is the reliance, in the American armed services as well as in some of its police forces, on Muslims to come in and teach about "what Islam teaches." The naivete here is the stuff of schoolgirls, and beyond belief.
Posts: 24 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Meena, what happened with that case? I know the New York Post was covering it extensively. Originally it was thought there was a connection between the father arguing religious stuff on a rough forum, and looking at the way people talk in religious/political stuff in here, it wouldn't shock me. But I think there was an understanding that it was just a robbery... I lost track of it over the past months. For anyone to delight in the murders of innocents is sick and disgusting. But there are plenty of twisted people out there. Regarding the texts, Christianity used to be sufficiently violent too - public whippings for bigamy here in the US and death sentences for blasphemy all over the Christian world. Maybe the moslems are just that many years behind....don't forget its only 1426 in the Islamic world. How did this get in the ICKY hijab thread?
Posts: 1161 | From: wo xiang xiao bian ji si le | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
My Apologies Gaylon Embrey Evidently several outstanding groups were inadvertently left out of the article on "The Age of Specialization." (The Examiner, September, 1987.) My apologies are extended. At the time I felt sure I had thought of every minority group in the Brotherhood presently struggling along without a Minister of its very own. It now turns out there are other groups I neglected to mention. This was inexcusable on my part, particularly since these disciples are far too noticeable not to notice. How I overlooked them I cannot imagine. In any event, no special interest group in a congregation should be left Minister-less. Therefore Church leaders today need to add the following Ministers to their growing staff.
FAT MINISTERS. Now please don't take this lightly. Is it not a fact that in every sizable congregation there are a number of sizable saints? Can you think of a group wrestling with a larger problem? Or anyone more discriminated against? Yet at the moment most Churches do not take their burden seriously. Seems like I did hear a while back (probably just a vicious rumor) that a few progressive congregations have started aerobic classes for the faithful fat who enroll in their Family Life Center. To be honest, I have not weighed any of their members in and out to see if this rumor is true. Anyway, even if it is, I doubt they have a special staff Officer called "The Minister of the Fat" specifically assigned to this weighty problem. These Churches need to correct this oversight. One thing sure, the "denominational Churches" have already proven that similar programs are effective. A few weeks ago, in fact, I came across a solicitation from an enterprising company offering "an exciting new diet program for believers." (Presumably this diet will not work on fat sinners.) According to the sales pitch, this "3D" program of Discipline, Discipleship and DIET has already been used by over 12,000 Churches in Christendom. Since we of the Churches of Christ get most of our good ideas from the denominations anyway, surely this one deserves consideration. But may I offer a word of advice to Church leaders contemplating a "Minister of the Fat"? In selecting an appropriate Minister to fill this spot on the roster, overall body weight should be the largest consideration. Certainly a skinny Minister will never do. Fat Christians definitely need a Fat Minister to teach them the great truths about temperance, self-control and such like. In any case, without having a "Minister" of their own size and shape to "minister" to them, how can the heavyweight Christians among us ever hope to cope?
UGLY MINISTERS. Now don't frown at this idea. Excess weight is by no means the only problem that some Church members have to face every morning. What about those dear disciples who are ugly? I mean UGLY! Don't they deserve attention? Yes, a few extra pounds in the wrong place may be "ugly fat;" but please bear in mind that slender saints can have the "uglies" also. And for those severely afflicted, being ugly can turn out to be worse than being short, left-handed, bald, or even fat for that matter. Church leaders, I fear, have ignored these ugly duckling disciples too long. With incredible insensitivity they have sought, found and filled the pulpits with handsome preachers groomed as Dick Clark look a-likes. Oh, now and then a preacher with a mild case of ugliness has been able to slip into a prestigious pulpit. But not very often. For the most part the homely preachers have either been cut from the squad or sent to the minor leagues. They are just not able to relate to the "beautiful people" in the pews, or vice versa. This makes for an ugly situation, if you will pardon the pun. Just think of how all the ducklings out there feel having to face a pretty preacher every Sunday. Horrors! By all rights, shouldn't ugly Christians be provided with an ugly Minister? Why not? Don't the young have one of their own kind? I believe if Churches would just take the time, they could scout around (perhaps in the minor leagues) and eventually locate plenty of preachers ugly enough to qualify for this important new "ministry." Again, don't make fun of this. We can preach all we want to about "the beauty of holiness" but this just won't cut it in a society more impressed with "the beauty of Hollywood."
MINISTERIAL MINISTERS. This is no doubt the Minister to end all Ministers, the Minister who "ministers" to the rest of the Ministers. Think about this. Are Ministers real people? Do real people have problems? Don't Ministers need to be "ministered" to, too? Yet, as yet, no Church among us has a "Minister to the Ministers." This is rather strange. I can easily see how some of the other groups mentioned might be ignored by the modern Church, since they are low profile minorities, usually unorganized and powerless. Such is not the case with the "Ministers" in a Church. In the typical metropolitan Church today the "staff" of special Ministers is the most unique, most distinct, most notable group in the congregation. They are high profile, up front and center, on the letterhead, in the weekly announcements, etc. How could they possibly be overlooked? There may very well be more "Ministers" around the church building than any other group. Just think about the monumental problems these Ministers must face from day to day. The young ones just "entering the Ministry" have all the ropes to learn, the older ones being forced to "leave the Ministry" for the real world face a cultural shock, and those in their ministerial prime have a host of personal and political problems to deal with. But, alas, as things now stand, these men have no "Minister" of their own to turn to. For relief most of them have to resort to golf. Churches ought to be ashamed. Each Eldership, therefore, should seriously consider hiring a "Minister of the Ministers." A Fat Minister, an Ugly Minister, will only touch the life of a few; but a Minister of the Ministers will, directly or indirectly, help everyone in the congregation. And surely, with the addition of this Minister, the Church Staff will truly "be perfect and entire, wanting nothing."
I sincerely hope the fat and ugly among us, along with all Church Ministers, including those who are fat and ugly, will accept my apologies for leaving them off the former list. Believe me, it was not on purpose. Now hopefully, when these additional suggestions are correctly considered, every special interest group in the Brotherhood will be satisfied -- "ministerally" anyway.
Posts: 24 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
When you look at me All that you can see is the scarf that covers my hair My words you can't hear because you're too full of fear, mouth gaping, all you do is stare
You think it's not my choice in your own "liberation" rejoice. You think I'm uneducated, trapped, oppressed and subjugated, You're so thankful that you're free.
But non-Muslim woman you've got it wrong You're the weak and I'm the strong. For I've rejected the trap of man. Fancy clothes - low neck, short skirt those are devices for pain and hurt. I'm not falling for that little plan.
I'm a person with ideas and thought. I'm not for sale, I can't be bought. I'm me - not a fancy toy, I won't decorate anyone's arm, nor be promoted for my charm. There is more to be than playing coy.
Living life as a balancing game - mother, daughter, wife, nurse, cleaner, cook, lover and still bring home a wage. Who thought up this modern "freedom"? Where man can love'em and man can leave'em. This is not free, but life in a cage. Always jumping to a male agenda competing on his terms. No job share, no creche facilities, no feeding and nappy changing amenities No time off for menstrual pain, "hormones" they laugh "what a shame" No equal pay equal skill your job they can always fill. No promotion unless you're sterilised. No promotion unless you're sexually terrorised. And this is liberation?
Non-Muslim woman you can have your life. Mine - it has less strife. I cover and I get respected, surely that's to be expected, for I won't demean the feminine, I won't live to male criterion, I dance to my own tune and I hope you see this very soon. For your own sake - wake up and use your sight. Are you so sure that you are right?
From a Muslim Woman
Posts: 22 | From: cairo | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Morgan, you have to work on some of your stretch marks, dear.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic