Crusades began after Islam conquered most of Christianity

[Deleted]

Jul 10, 2016 23:28:00 GMT Scottish Lassie said:

Hi Menantol, when a person goes on holiday what do they do? Are they going to choose a place that is dilapidated or are they going to choose somewhere that has great scenery and the accommodation squeaky clean? We plan our actions and choose something that will produce the best experience, that is logical.

Every choice that we make depends on the emotions of love and hate, we are going to gravitate towards a choice that hopefully will be beneficial for our all over wellbeing. We are making decisions all the time and I am sure that we are always trying to improve on our circumstance personally and for the smooth running of life in general.

No Scottish Lassie. People have choices open to them at any time.  Those choices are the result of many different things.  Things that have nothing to do with your love and hate, rather, opportunities come from the mix of all those we deal with and they have there own that rarely have (relative to us) have anything to do with love and hate. 

If we become so self-centered as to view the world as love and hate relative to ourselves  we miss the connections with others and become ineffectual and without meaning.

[Scottish Lassie]

Hi Menantol, everyone looks after their own best interests or they wouldn't be human. It is unnatural unless you are dealing with children.That is why a mother becomes so emotional after having given birth. She is provided with the hormones that will make sure that she loves her child, and will care for that child despite any inconvenience that might prevail. I won't be changing my opinion any time soon, we as human beings will most always choose to do things that will be of benefit to them in some way, to me that is natural. Everyone is seeking happiness.

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Jul 10, 2016 23:55:12 GMT Scottish Lassie said:

Hi Bush Admirer, How come there are thousands of Muslims living in peace in western countries? Because they obey the law of the land, so if THEY can do it, so can others.We have to resolve the present situation somehow. Life is precious as I see it and we could quite easily solve the problem by having a more peaceful attitude, we have to work towards that aim. The question is : how do we do it? I think children need to be taught appropriate behaviour for starters and we need good role models for that to be successful. Any suggestions?

Peaceful Muslims who integrate into Western Society aren't the problem Scottish Lassie. They're irrelevant. It is the fanatical hard core extremist Muslims, Like ISIS and their supporters, who are the problem.

If only 1 in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000, or 1 in 10000 turns out to be a mass murderer then better not to admit any of them.

[Deleted]

Jul 11, 2016 1:27:30 GMT Scottish Lassie said:

Hi Menantol, everyone looks after their own best interests or they wouldn't be human. It is unnatural unless you are dealing with children.That is why a mother becomes so emotional after having given birth. She is provided with the hormones that will make sure that she loves her child, and will care for that child despite any inconvenience that might prevail. I won't be changing my opinion any time soon, we as human beings will most always choose to do things that will be of benefit to them in some way, to me that is natural. Everyone is seeking happiness.

Stick to the subject you began Scottish Lassie, that is, love, hate.



Love and hate is not the same as seeking happiness. There are those who have sought a form of happiness by killing others or by steeling, or any number of things detrimental to others.



Again, it is likely very satisfying to live in a world of myth and make believe, but the only way to achieve a meaningful life is to immerse yourself in the real world. Rub elbows with others in the daily challenge of living. Not every moment is a happy endeavor, some moments are downright rotten, but they are life and in that of mixing your sweat with the sweat of others life has meaning, maybe not happiness, but meaning.

[Big Lin]

Jul 11, 2016 13:37:18 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Jul 10, 2016 23:55:12 GMT Scottish Lassie said:

Hi Bush Admirer, How come there are thousands of Muslims living in peace in western countries? Because they obey the law of the land, so if THEY can do it, so can others.We have to resolve the present situation somehow. Life is precious as I see it and we could quite easily solve the problem by having a more peaceful attitude, we have to work towards that aim. The question is : how do we do it? I think children need to be taught appropriate behaviour for starters and we need good role models for that to be successful. Any suggestions?

Peaceful Muslims who integrate into Western Society aren't the problem Scottish Lassie. They're irrelevant. It is the fanatical hard core extremist Muslims, Like ISIS and their supporters, who are the problem.

If only 1 in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000, or 1 in 10000 turns out to be a mass murderer then better not to admit any of them.

The total lack of logic in that post is almost unbelievable.

I really am disappointed to see you sounding like a Flat Earthist, BA.

To say that the fact that the majority of Muslims DO act peacefully within Western Society is 'irrelevant' is rather like saying that the majority of Americans who do NOT commit crimes is 'irrelevant.'

If only 1 in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10000 turns out to be a murderer then better not to admit ANY Americans to foreign countries.

Can't you honestly see how irrational your attitude is?

I do despair, sometimes, I really do.

If I'm not having to fight the loony left I'm having to fight the rabid right.

Why don't all you extremists try and take a deep breath and start working on the basis of facts and logic rather than ignorance and prejudice?

[Big Lin]

Jul 4, 2016 22:02:20 GMT @menantol said:

Jul 4, 2016 21:28:44 GMT Big Lin said:

Nor do Islamophobes it seems.

Now I'm getting rather sick of feeling like I'm a teacher addressing a bunch of 5-year old kids.

The simple FACT is that NO ONE - now or EVER - not at ANY time in history - spoke a language called ROMAN.

The language of the Roman Empire was Latin.

NOT Roman.

Why don't you just accept that French is - as usual - FACTUALLY WRONG?

I'm beginning to feel like I'm addressing a convention of Flat-Earthists!

Big Lin, you can refer to all of us or some of us as 5-year old kids or Flat-Earthists or those accused of Islamophobia or any disparaging descriptive term that you want, but that will make little difference as from my perspective you are not reading what is written here.



The City of Rome was a world community in that it was comprised of all sorts of people and cultures. Obviously they spoke Latin and did so as representing differing versions of societal groups within the Latin world. So too with Greek as it was the language of the educated and the language of logical interchanges of rhetoric, and there were languages of the Germanic peoples in all of the differing Celtic people languages, and obviously there was Hebrew, and on and on and on.



The acceptance and use of multiple languages was a very Roman trait in that they did little to force people to change their local beliefs and activities and so too with language. To speak Roman was to speak in the languages of Rome. That doesn’t seem difficult to understand.

A FACT is a FACT.

Not ONE person - in the entire history of the human race - EVER spoke 'Roman.'

It's got NOTHING to do with multiple languages or anything else.

It's a simple FACT that there never WAS a language called 'Roman.'

I don't know why you can't grasp that simple point.

That is just ONE of MANY of the FACTUAL AND PROVABLE ERRORS French makes.

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Jul 11, 2016 22:06:30 GMT Big Lin said:

Jul 11, 2016 13:37:18 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Peaceful Muslims who integrate into Western Society aren't the problem Scottish Lassie. They're irrelevant. It is the fanatical hard core extremist Muslims, Like ISIS and their supporters, who are the problem.

If only 1 in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000, or 1 in 10000 turns out to be a mass murderer then better not to admit any of them.

The total lack of logic in that post is almost unbelievable.

I really am disappointed to see you sounding like a Flat Earthist, BA.

To say that the fact that the majority of Muslims DO act peacefully within Western Society is 'irrelevant' is rather like saying that the majority of Americans who do NOT commit crimes is 'irrelevant.'

If only 1 in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10000 turns out to be a murderer then better not to admit ANY Americans to foreign countries.

Can't you honestly see how irrational your attitude is?

I do despair, sometimes, I really do.

If I'm not having to fight the loony left I'm having to fight the rabid right.

Why don't all you extremists try and take a deep breath and start working on the basis of facts and logic rather than ignorance and prejudice?

Lin - What I meant to say is 'irrelevant to the problem of terrorism.' That is, the majority peaceful muslims aren't responsible for terrorist attacks like those in Paris, San Bernardino, and Orlando.

This is elementary Lin. If we admit no Muslims, we admit no Muslim terrorists. On the other hand, and more importantly, if we admit 10,000 Muslims there are bound to be some sleeper terrorist cells amongst them.

Weigh off the pros and cons.

Seems obvious to me. Admit zero and problem solved. Why in the world would you want to do anything else?

[♫anna♫]

Jul 11, 2016 22:14:00 GMT Big Lin said:

Jul 4, 2016 22:02:20 GMT @menantol said:

Big Lin, you can refer to all of us or some of us as 5-year old kids or Flat-Earthists or those accused of Islamophobia or any disparaging descriptive term that you want, but that will make little difference as from my perspective you are not reading what is written here.



The City of Rome was a world community in that it was comprised of all sorts of people and cultures. Obviously they spoke Latin and did so as representing differing versions of societal groups within the Latin world. So too with Greek as it was the language of the educated and the language of logical interchanges of rhetoric, and there were languages of the Germanic peoples in all of the differing Celtic people languages, and obviously there was Hebrew, and on and on and on.



The acceptance and use of multiple languages was a very Roman trait in that they did little to force people to change their local beliefs and activities and so too with language. To speak Roman was to speak in the languages of Rome. That doesn’t seem difficult to understand.

A FACT is a FACT.

Not ONE person - in the entire history of the human race - EVER spoke 'Roman.'

It's got NOTHING to do with multiple languages or anything else.

It's a simple FACT that there never WAS a language called 'Roman.'

I don't know why you can't grasp that simple point.

That is just ONE of MANY of the FACTUAL AND PROVABLE ERRORS French makes.

Dear Big Lin ,
Whether we talk of a Roman language, an American language or a British language is up to us to decide and the reference to a "Roman language" as I've shown on a previous post is used by some people. We both in our own way like a purity of language, but expressions that one or both of us don't wish to accept will be used.

Dr. Warren simply avoided saying the inhabitants of the Roman empire spoke Latin because most people at that time spoke "Vulgar Latin", which was arguably no longer Latin anymore than Italian is.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgar_Latin
True "Roman language" is an expression that refers to the language or languages of the Romans, etc. and not a particular language. SPLC fell flat on it's face trying to twist that one around to something else.

slideplayer.com/slide/6981551/

slideplayer.com/slide/7976302/

[Deleted]

Jul 11, 2016 23:19:01 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Jul 11, 2016 22:06:30 GMT Big Lin said:

The total lack of logic in that post is almost unbelievable.

I really am disappointed to see you sounding like a Flat Earthist, BA.

To say that the fact that the majority of Muslims DO act peacefully within Western Society is 'irrelevant' is rather like saying that the majority of Americans who do NOT commit crimes is 'irrelevant.'

If only 1 in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10000 turns out to be a murderer then better not to admit ANY Americans to foreign countries.

Can't you honestly see how irrational your attitude is?

I do despair, sometimes, I really do.

If I'm not having to fight the loony left I'm having to fight the rabid right.

Why don't all you extremists try and take a deep breath and start working on the basis of facts and logic rather than ignorance and prejudice?

Lin - What I meant to say is 'irrelevant to the problem of terrorism.' That is, the majority peaceful muslims aren't responsible for terrorist attacks like those in Paris, San Bernardino, and Orlando.

This is elementary Lin. If we admit no Muslims, we admit no Muslim terrorists. On the other hand, and more importantly, if we admit 10,000 Muslims there are bound to be some sleeper terrorist cells amongst them.

Weigh off the pros and cons.

Seems obvious to me. Admit zero and problem solved. Why in the world would you want to do anything else?

I give up Big Lin.  Your belief is cast in concrete and your obsessive hatred of Bill Warren is an absolute barrier to any discussion on this point.

[♫anna♫]

Things leftist liberals don't want to hear.

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Mar 22, 2017 18:34:56 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

Things leftist liberals don't want to hear.

Excellent video Anna. Thanks for putting it up here.