gee i wonder who benefits most from a policy of
Christianity V Islam
Quote:
Originally Posted by n david
So you stand by the statement in which you hope "they eat" my twin 9-month old and 6 year old daughters, even though it's not "nice?" And you hope this is done in order to "improve the gene pool." Again, you claim it's true, though not "nice."
I'm not mad at you. You're seriously off your meds and need some psychiatric help before you have a psychotic breakdown. I doubt you would say the same thing standing in front of me, so this doesn't really bother me.
Obviously, I'm really not responsible or culpable for any crisis. The only one's culpable for this crisis are the animals in the videos shown attacking innocent bystanders and destroying businesses, cars, etc. Muslims are culpable here, not me. There's still this thing called personal responsibility.
No, Arab countries aren't taking in refugees because they recognize these animals would reign terror in their cities. |
well, i'm comfortable being the guy who erased the comment, if you're comfortable being the one who quotes it back from obscurity. Wadr you do seem to be begging for it; which doesn't make my saying it acceptable. I would much prefer that you recognize, and make it not true.
obviously, a policy of
all Muslims are lost has nothing to do with why these "animals" are all running for their lives, from your bombs--almost surely probably. The Arab countries that are not taking in any refugees, Zero, are all coincidentally US allies. Hmm. But they are Muslims, too; so aren't they "animals," as well?
don't worry; your reply doesn't have to make any sense--just hit "post"
