Egypt: 529 people sentenced to death in one ruling!

May 21, 2003
19,849
147
Not The Eshaalic Goozpublic !
#41
Where did I saw Mullahs were secular? I said some secularists they have Mullah mentality. Ideology is unimportant here, it's the principles people carry.
this is true when your ideology does not influence your principles.
there is a little bit of confusion here.

Are you saying for example someone who has the ideology of communism could live like a ruthless capitalist that bases his life on profit and money making only ???

No need to go further than this board. This board is full of intolerant people who wave the secularist flag - of course this board also has secularists who are tolerant and have democratic principles. Just like there are Muslims, Communists, Nationalists, Jews, Christians, Buddhists etc. who are on both sides of the fence too.
due to your prejudice towards religion and god you call criticism intolerance. to call a murderer a murderer is not intolerance, it is logical and being true.
When someone says they are a muslim that means they follow the ideology (or religion) whose fundamentals were constructed 14 centuries ago in Saudi arabia. Several of such principles were based on invading and destroying other human beings livelihood for your own ascendency, politically and economically.

I reject this ideology and religion as inhumane and savage and i call its followers sub-human, ignorant murderers. Am I being intolerant or are you too scared to face reality.

My ideology is atheism and as soon as i get a minute I read and learn more about topics, principles and this way of thinking. you on the other hand are scared to read your own philosophy in Farsi without interpretation because you know as soon as the last page is done you will throw the book on the shelf and will be forced to cleanse your mind from this ideology.

you as mullahs or muftis to interpret the book for you and they you follow what they tell you blind.


To summarise it is not humane to respect everyone's opinion. One should respect a philosophy when it deserves respect. And regardless of race, gender and creed it is the utmost duty of all human beings to reject and expose any philosophy that tricks, corrupts and ultimately destroys other humans beings mentally and/or physically.
 
Jun 18, 2005
10,889
5
#42
which wave of execution are you talking about? if you're talking about the executions from 1988/1367, you're an even bigger scumbag and piece of shit than I thought.
lol baz to ghorsato nakhordi mongol omadi inja pache migiri? Judging by your shitty looks I say we are out of luck as far as you getting laid anytime soon. :(
 
Jun 18, 2005
10,889
5
#43
could you please provide the name of a few of these secularist mollahs and some of their publications or speeches that prove they are secular.
thank you.
Why do you even waste your time with someone who was saying FBI was behind the Boston bombing? Even Khamenei kos maghz ham in koso sher be zehnesh nareside bud. lol
 

Chinaski

Elite Member
Jun 14, 2005
12,269
352
#44
The guy you are talking about is an idiot for a lot of other reasons but his Statement regarding the involvement of US Admin in those bombings was Not One of those reasons . Infact its more idiotic to deny the fact that US Admin has been carrying out false flag actions for decades and they Dont even deny it. As said whoever thinks US gangsterism and cold bloodedness in this regard is just a saga , is Not only naive but really an idiot.
 

feyenoord

Bench Warmer
Aug 23, 2005
1,706
0
#45
Echoing Feyenoord's sentiments, you can be a piece of shit - whether you wear the cloak of religion or not - is what suits your self-interest at the time.

I'm serious - some secular Iranians are Mullahs 2.0 - they want everyone executed and their tolerance levels are fascist-ly low. The problem in our society is not Islam, Communism, Secularism or any other ideology, it's that people that claim to be proponents of that ideology cannot tolerate anyone but their own contradictory self. And facsism starts at home, starts often with a domineering and dictatorial father, a gossipy family who is sitting in judgment of everyone else besides themselves etc. and they project all this shit out.

They cannot see past their nose (and Iranians have big noses, coincidence?)
Dear Silverton,


When it comes to philosophy and oppression. These are two words that should be the last thing someone like Kayvan Pars writing about. He probably does not know that philosophy has moved on to analyse what is oppression. Many philosophers and political philosophers have tried to analyse repressive thought and repression by teasing it out from human mind. Many have moved in the recent decades in the sphere of linguistics to understand the origins of repressive thoughts. While some have written about religions, others think the very simple conversations individuals have during the day can have repressive items in them. Just have a look at Kayvan Pars's use of language use. It is not only not logical but it is beyond anything that you can call repressive. Or theyguy who have written a quote about Bertrand Russell. It is amazing how they use words, philosophy and people in order to show that they are progressed. Yet, someone who has a bit of knowledge can expose these individuals and their way of thinking quickly.

I am not sure if you know Aramesh Doossdar and he is famous book "Emtena dar taffakore dini". http://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/آرامش_دوستدار. But in is book he is talking about being "dinkhoo". A phenomenon you see a lot in Iranians, given that they have lived for a couple of millenniums with religious thought as well probably with a Arbab Raayat system. This phenomenon he explains is the mentality of us Iranians, including the ones like Kayvan. He explains it with in a question with Sedaye Alman:
دويچه وله: آقای دوستدار از پاسخ شما استفاده می کنم و پرسشی ساده نما را مطرح می کنم. يک «مومن» از نظر شما چه هنگام «دينخو» نيست و يک به اصطلاح «بی***ايمان» چه هنگامی «دينخو» است؟

آرامش دوستدار: يک مومن وقتی دينخو نيست که قادر باشد آنچه را که بدان ايمان دارد شخصی تلقی کند، از خودش جدا کند و بعد به مسئله ای که می پردازد کاملا فارغ باشد از آن نوع اعتقاد ايمانى***اش. در اينصورت هر مومنی می تواند به نظر من اينکار را بکند. چنانکه خيلی ها در تهران اين کار را کرده اند. و يک کسی می تواند روشنفکر باشد و در عين حال دينخو باشد. يعنی در واقع مدعی روشنفکری باشد در اين حد که تبعيت بکند از يک مرام خاص. اين را ما در فرهنگ خودمان در اين دوره ی ۵۰ ساله ی اخير می شناسيم. همه ی کسانی که علاقمند بوده اند و به گونه ای توده ای بودند يا سمپاتيزان حزب توده يا مارکسيسم ـ لنينيسم بودند، در واقع هيچگاه از خودشان نپرسيده اند که ما چرا بايد به چنين چيزی اعتقاد پيدا بکنيم. آن نوع روالی که آنها اتخاذ کرده اند، مثلا در مورد مارکسيسم ـ لنينيسم، برای من دينخويی ست، در حاليکه يک مومن به محض اينکه قادر باشد در پژوهش امور، در نگريستن امور ايمان خودش را برای خودش شخصی نگهدارد، آن آدم دينخو نيست.

Now, do you know what these people are trying to do? people like this Chinaski and Kayvan try to shut your way of thinking by using repressive language. Now, last time, you went angry and left. But dont do it because engaging with Iranians as such have made me experienced understanding their mentality. They are like AN who you need to be exposing the nonsense in their logic and be harsh at the the same time.

This way of thinking is near end btw. Why? because social sciences have educated the young generation in Iran to think critically about stuff. Not only religion but also the whole load other nonsense that is being sold to people by different groups.
 
May 21, 2003
19,849
147
Not The Eshaalic Goozpublic !
#47
Dear Silverton,


When it comes to philosophy and oppression. These are two words that should be the last thing someone like Kayvan Pars writing about. He probably does not know that philosophy has moved on to analyse what is oppression.
unfortunately, this way of thinking is embedded in your mind probably since birth to assume and construct opinions without any sort of proof and reasoning.

Many philosophers and political philosophers have tried to analyse repressive thought and repression by teasing it out from human mind. Many have moved in the recent decades in the sphere of linguistics to understand the origins of repressive thoughts. While some have written about religions, others think the very simple conversations individuals have during the day can have repressive items in them. Just have a look at Kayvan Pars's use of language use.
I move to refer you to my comments above with an added description:
When one is cornered, such as a murderer over the body with the murder weapon in their hand, knowing getting caught means death or a life sentence, they would try to run if surrounded they will definitely will attempt to shoot their way out. This is exactly being done here

I did not know that i was talking to you people as a 'group', since I am, I will say it again. To respect a philosophy just because it is 'someone's philosophy' or respect a religion since a billion people believe in it is ROOT CAUSE OF ALL EVIL that is being done in the world.

you, not so cleverly, have avoided these statements by launching a personal attack while victimizing yourself and your fellow muslim. It was not even a good try but very transparent to see through. Again I ask any of you why should I respect a religion just because it is someone's religion ?


It is not only not logical but it is beyond anything that you can call repressive. Or theyguy who have written a quote about Bertrand Russell. It is amazing how they use words, philosophy and people in order to show that they are progressed. Yet, someone who has a bit of knowledge can expose these individuals and their way of thinking quickly.
I allow him to answer for his own quote.

but don't you people, five times a day, say and recite other people's words ??? Don't you people for every situation in life erupt with comments from folan emaam or folan hadis. I don't get it. Do you mean to say it is only ok for you people who are allowed to put your life on hold five times a day and mimic other people's words and no body else is. Is that it ?
Do you think you are special because you are indoctrinated with eslam and others are not good enough? could you please explain.

I am not sure if you know Aramesh Doossdar and he is famous book "Emtena dar taffakore dini". http://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/آرامش_دوستدار. But in is book he is talking about being "dinkhoo". A phenomenon you see a lot in Iranians, given that they have lived for a couple of millenniums with religious thought as well probably with a Arbab Raayat system. This phenomenon he explains is the mentality of us Iranians, including the ones like Kayvan. He explains it with in a question with Sedaye Alman:
دويچه وله: آقای دوستدار از پاسخ شما استفاده می کنم و پرسشی ساده نما را مطرح می کنم. يک «مومن» از نظر شما چه هنگام «دينخو» نيست و يک به اصطلاح «بی***ايمان» چه هنگامی «دينخو» است؟

آرامش دوستدار: يک مومن وقتی دينخو نيست که قادر باشد آنچه را که بدان ايمان دارد شخصی تلقی کند، از خودش جدا کند و بعد به مسئله ای که می پردازد کاملا فارغ باشد از آن نوع اعتقاد ايمانى***اش. در اينصورت هر مومنی می تواند به نظر من اينکار را بکند. چنانکه خيلی ها در تهران اين کار را کرده اند. و يک کسی می تواند روشنفکر باشد و در عين حال دينخو باشد. يعنی در واقع مدعی روشنفکری باشد در اين حد که تبعيت بکند از يک مرام خاص. اين را ما در فرهنگ خودمان در اين دوره ی ۵۰ ساله ی اخير می شناسيم. همه ی کسانی که علاقمند بوده اند و به گونه ای توده ای بودند يا سمپاتيزان حزب توده يا مارکسيسم ـ لنينيسم بودند، در واقع هيچگاه از خودشان نپرسيده اند که ما چرا بايد به چنين چيزی اعتقاد پيدا بکنيم. آن نوع روالی که آنها اتخاذ کرده اند، مثلا در مورد مارکسيسم ـ لنينيسم، برای من دينخويی ست، در حاليکه يک مومن به محض اينکه قادر باشد در پژوهش امور، در نگريستن امور ايمان خودش را برای خودش شخصی نگهدارد، آن آدم دينخو نيست.
I am not familiar with this book. However, rather than launching REPRESSIVE personal attacks such as you I would appreciate you providing a link to an online version so I can read through it and then we could have a discussion on it if you would like. I thank you ahead of time.

Now, do you know what these people are trying to do? people like this Chinaski and Kayvan try to shut your way of thinking by using repressive language. Now, last time, you went angry and left. But dont do it because engaging with Iranians as such have made me experienced understanding their mentality. They are like AN who you need to be exposing the nonsense in their logic and be harsh at the the same time.

This way of thinking is near end btw. Why? because social sciences have educated the young generation in Iran to think critically about stuff. Not only religion but also the whole load other nonsense that is being sold to people by different groups.
of course what you are saying is correct to some extent.
When someone realises what they are conditioned to believe since birth is nothing more than baseless and empty promises they would be frustrated and angry.

But the crucial step is to go beyond that anger and learn more and free yourself from invisible chains.
I hope we all could achieve that.

one way to vent the anger is use personal attacks and libel, as you are doing now, but no matter what you say I, personally, will never respect an opinion be it yours or others because 'you' have that opinion. I am not here to server your vanity.

Namaaz that is the pillar of the muslim religion starts with:
حمد و سوره

saying:

قل هوالله لأحد



مشکل همین جا شروع میشه
مگه آدم خودش مغز نداره که بهش دستور داده بشه بگو خدا یکی است .

هر وقت کسی توانست به من ثابت کند چیزی رو که میگن خدا وجود داره در هوا و اون تیکه سنگی که در کعبه به اسم الله بوده و مردم به قریش پول میدادن که برن زیارتش نیست اون وقت تازه میشه نشست و راجه به احد بودنش حرف زد


unfortunately I cannot respect the above statements. They are pillars of mental and as a result of that physical slavery of other human beings.
 
Last edited:

Chinaski

Elite Member
Jun 14, 2005
12,269
352
#48
کیوان جان، اینجا تو این سایت ما هیچوقت کمبود بیسواد نداشتیم. تا دلت بخواد از اینا ریخته، منتها ۳، ۴ تا از این بیسواد ها علاوه بر بیسوادی، رذل و پست فطرت هم هستند و این فاينورد همیشه عضو این گروهک بوده. وقتت رو با این موجود هدر نکن 😊
 
May 21, 2003
19,849
147
Not The Eshaalic Goozpublic !
#49
کیوان جان، اینجا تو این سایت ما هیچوقت کمبود بیسواد نداشتیم. تا دلت بخواد از اینا ریخته، منتها ۳، ۴ تا از این بیسواد ها علاوه بر بیسوادی، رذل و پست فطرت هم هستند و این فاينورد همیشه عضو این گروهک بوده. وقتت رو با این موجود هدر نکن
China jaan,
I have a few head-to-heads with him but I think i was too naive and I would be tricked by him to fall into a tit-for-tat battle with him and as a result the conversation would end.

Since then i have learnt a few things and I am challenging his comments openly to provide backup for his comments.

If there is no direct reply and no discussions on the points then you are A HUNDRED PERCENT right.

Since many hundreds of thousands of people who are born in Iran are also born into such mentality it is interesting for me to explore their way of thinking and hopefully in some years at least we can find out what is at the root ?

This abstract fear of the man made 'GOD' or religions. where does it come from ? I have a couple of very basic theories but I would rather wait to see if they have anything to say.
 

parham79

Bench Warmer
Dec 5, 2009
1,767
0
#50
The brave egyption armed forces is cutting the head of the snake and eradicating the head of this shameless brother terroristhood party . Something the shah refused to do in 1977 and 1978.Heck even in 1962 by executing khomenie.. I don't think killing the foot soldiers will happen, but the leadership needs to be eradicated to send a powerfull message. Unlike our own version of islamist tie weraring charlattans(melli mazhabis), the egyption are not listening to their tie wearing islamists. Our melli mazhabi bastards needed to executed in 1978. However the egyption people cameout and supported sisi and are not repeating our mistakes..
 
Last edited:

feyenoord

Bench Warmer
Aug 23, 2005
1,706
0
#52
QUOTE=keyvan_pars;1070495
unfortunately, this way of thinking is embedded in your mind probably since birth to assume and construct opinions without any sort of proof and reasoning
Dear,

Anyone with a bit of knowledge about philosophy (or political philosophy) knows that there is nothing in your opinion referring to any paradigm within the field. Even the last word of the above sentence is something you should not be using at all. There is nothing that has to do with reason in your opinion. It is mostly angry rant.

Moreover, you assume the whole time that this is in me and that is in me since birth or whatever, which is also another nonsense opinion. This whole statement is nothing but a rhetoric to come across as reasonable. However, if you are referring to psychoanalysis, then it is whole a lot easier to make assumptions about YOU. But lets not even go there.



I move to refer you to my comments above with an added description:
When one is cornered, such as a murderer over the body with the murder weapon in their hand, knowing getting caught means death or a life sentence, they would try to run if surrounded they will definitely will attempt to shoot their way out. This is exactly being done here
These are assumptions coming from your traumatized mind. Believe me, political analysis is not done like this. This is a "Akhoondi" and very Iranian way of thinking about issues, using simple analogies. You dont simplify issues like this. Political science, sociology and in general social sciences are far more complicated than that.

I did not know that i was talking to you people as a 'group', since I am, I will say it again. To respect a philosophy just because it is 'someone's philosophy' or respect a religion since a billion people believe in it is ROOT CAUSE OF ALL EVIL that is being done in the world.

you, not so cleverly, have avoided these statements by launching a personal attack while victimizing yourself and your fellow muslim. It was not even a good try but very transparent to see through. Again I ask any of you why should I respect a religion just because it is someone's religion ?
These are all assumptions. Again, nothing to with reason, logic or anything else. Just rhetoric.



I allow him to answer for his own quote.

but don't you people, five times a day, say and recite other people's words ??? Don't you people for every situation in life erupt with comments from folan emaam or folan hadis. I don't get it. Do you mean to say it is only ok for you people who are allowed to put your life on hold five times a day and mimic other people's words and no body else is. Is that it ?
Do you think you are special because you are indoctrinated with eslam and others are not good enough? could you please explain.
I dont if he does that or not. But if he does it that his issue. When Voltaire and those other humanists were writing, they did not know that other gods will be created. Today in the world we see a culture of aggressive consumerism that has nothing to do with rational or humanistic thinking. Moreover, around you, you see a lot of people who are "dinkhoo", and like to get obsessive with issues, creating gods in their heads. Hollywood culture is a good example. In my opinion that is the biggest waste of generations and human minds...This is what also philosophy has moved towards. That is to say that there is no absolute truth in anything especially coming to ideologies. The guy under explains it better (btw, i do not care who he is but he is right!).

[video=youtube;6D7rWLzloOI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6D7rWLzloOI[/video]


I am not familiar with this book. However, rather than launching REPRESSIVE personal attacks such as you I would appreciate you providing a link to an online version so I can read through it and then we could have a discussion on it if you would like. I thank you ahead of time.
Not sure where to find the book. But I think you get the concept. It is very simple.



of course what you are saying is correct to some extent.
When someone realises what they are conditioned to believe since birth is nothing more than baseless and empty promises they would be frustrated and angry.
I have gone trough to that long time ago. But I did not get angry and frustrated. But I also question everything. Including what we have been sold to as the glorious past of Persia or Iran. Or a myth like. lets go and boycott the elections in Iran because that would somehow work for the better for our people??

But the crucial step is to go beyond that anger and learn more and free yourself from invisible chains.
I hope we all could achieve that.
What is Freedom? this is concept which is often debated about. What is free your self from chains? How to become free?

one way to vent the anger is use personal attacks and libel, as you are doing now, but no matter what you say I, personally, will never respect an opinion be it yours or others because 'you' have that opinion. I am not here to server your vanity.
You dont need to respect. As long as you can tolerate the existence of people with different way of thinking. Unfortunately, you seem not to better than the people you accuse of not being able to tolerate your existence.

Namaaz that is the pillar of the muslim religion starts with:
حمد و سوره

saying:

قل هوالله لأحد



مشکل همین جا شروع میشه
مگه آدم خودش مغز نداره که بهش دستور داده بشه بگو خدا یکی است .

هر وقت کسی توانست به من ثابت کند چیزی رو که میگن خدا وجود داره در هوا و اون تیکه سنگی که در کعبه به اسم الله بوده و مردم به قریش پول میدادن که برن زیارتش نیست اون وقت تازه میشه نشست و راجه به احد بودنش حرف زد


unfortunately I cannot respect the above statements. They are pillars of mental and as a result of that physical slavery of other human beings.
In be man rabti nadare. But again, human slavery is explained in many ways. Things are not simple as this, unless you have a very akhoondi way of thinking about issues.
 

feyenoord

Bench Warmer
Aug 23, 2005
1,706
0
#53
کیوان جان، اینجا تو این سایت ما هیچوقت کمبود بیسواد نداشتیم. تا دلت بخواد از اینا ریخته، منتها ۳، ۴ تا از این بیسواد ها علاوه بر بیسوادی، رذل و پست فطرت هم هستند و این فاينورد همیشه عضو این گروهک بوده. وقتت رو با این موجود هدر نکن 😊
LOL yani to too in site nabashi ke be ki ma bekhandim? shiriniye in forum toyee :D
 
May 21, 2003
19,849
147
Not The Eshaalic Goozpublic !
#54
my quote:
unfortunately, this way of thinking is embedded in your mind probably since birth to assume and construct opinions without any sort of proof and reasoning
Dear,

Anyone with a bit of knowledge about philosophy (or political philosophy) knows that there is nothing in your opinion referring to any paradigm within the field. Even the last word of the above sentence is something you should not be using at all. There is nothing that has to do with reason in your opinion. It is mostly angry rant.

Moreover, you assume the whole time that this is in me and that is in me since birth or whatever, which is also another nonsense opinion. This whole statement is nothing but a rhetoric to come across as reasonable. However, if you are referring to psychoanalysis, then it is whole a lot easier to make assumptions about YOU. But lets not even go there.
I ask, assuming that you believe that each side of a discussion has an equal right to ask questions, about proof and reasoning for the god and religion or whatever you believe him. In return of my 'RANTING QUESION' you reply that I do not have a basic knowledge of philosophy etc and my question is a rant.

what is more simple than asking for proof.

When you go to the bank and ask to withdraw 100 Euros do they check your account if you had a 100 euros and when they ask you instead of showing proof do you accuse them of ranting?

I have never claimed to be well informed in the field of philosophy and am not doing so right now. Neither have I claimed to be 'at least' a political philosopher.

however if you choose to call your religion a philosophy then I am somewhat informed about your 'philosophical prodcution of your religion' and am simply asking you for proof that your peyghambar is more than someone who historically was poor and found an ingenuous way to make himself rich based on other people's property.



my quote:
When one is cornered, such as a murderer over the body with the murder weapon in their hand, knowing getting caught means death or a life sentence, they would try to run if surrounded they will definitely will attempt to shoot their way out. This is exactly being done here
your reply:
These are assumptions coming from your traumatized mind. Believe me, political analysis is not done like this. This is a "Akhoondi" and very Iranian way of thinking about issues, using simple analogies. You dont simplify issues like this. Political science, sociology and in general social sciences are far more complicated than that.
Somehow, not surprisingly, more insults directed at my simple example above.
I have to disagree with you about simplifying matters because in such a case even a high school kid can at least produce some sort of response.
Again, for at least the fifth time, I request respectfully, for you or anyone else in this forum to produce some sort of structured evidence of how my 'not respecting an opinion just because it belongs to someone and only respecting it based on the philosophy itself' interacts with 'POLITICAL SCIENCE' , 'SOCIOLOGY', and far more complicated 'SOCIAL SCIENCES'.

please produce direct or indirect evidence if your anger allows it.


I dont if he does that or not. But if he does it that his issue. When Voltaire and those other humanists were writing, they did not know that other gods will be created. Today in the world we see a culture of aggressive consumerism that has nothing to do with rational or humanistic thinking. Moreover, around you, you see a lot of people who are "dinkhoo", and like to get obsessive with issues, creating gods in their heads. Hollywood culture is a good example. In my opinion that is the biggest waste of generations and human minds...This is what also philosophy has moved towards. That is to say that there is no absolute truth in anything especially coming to ideologies. The guy under explains it better (btw, i do not care who he is but he is right!).
agreed.

i requested:
I am not familiar with this book. However, rather than launching REPRESSIVE personal attacks such as you I would appreciate you providing a link to an online version so I can read through it and then we could have a discussion on it if you would like. I thank you ahead of time.
your reply:
Not sure where to find the book. But I think you get the concept. It is very simple.?
I am afraid for me, maybe because of my slow mind or inquisitive character or even my training at school, to get a 'concept' I need to study it. and that is not possible by reading a single paragraph.
I need more.


my quote:
But the crucial step is to go beyond that anger and learn more and free yourself from invisible chains.
I hope we all could achieve that.
your reply:
What is Freedom? this is concept which is often debated about. What is free your self from chains? How to become free?
In my view this can be achieved by questioning complex issues and seeking answers from any source necessary and a free thinker would dig for different sources on an unresolved topic.
That would at least represent a free way of thinking, or at least it does to me.

I wrote:
one way to vent the anger is use personal attacks and libel, as you are doing now, but no matter what you say I, personally, will never respect an opinion be it yours or others because 'you' have that opinion. I am not here to server your vanity.
you replied:
You dont need to respect. As long as you can tolerate the existence of people with different way of thinking. Unfortunately, you seem not to better than the people you accuse of not being able to tolerate your existence.
here i think there is a misunderstanding.
I never said i did not tolerate the existence of such person, with the exception of societies in which they can affect my way of life and well being. I said I will not and cannot respect their philosophy. What they want to believe in or practice is totally their own personal choice.

I can practice this right in secular societies that are not ruled by such people, but if i am in such an environment in which such people can hurt me and my loved ones i would first try to avoid them (my family's escape from IR) or if i cannot do that i will attempt to resist them by any means necessary.

I wrote:
Namaaz that is the pillar of the muslim religion starts with:
حمد و سوره

saying:

قل هوالله لأحد


مشکل همین جا شروع میشه
مگه آدم خودش مغز نداره که بهش دستور داده بشه بگو خدا یکی است .

هر وقت کسی توانست به من ثابت کند چیزی رو که میگن خدا وجود داره در هوا و اون تیکه سنگی که در کعبه به اسم الله بوده و مردم به قریش پول میدادن که برن زیارتش نیست اون وقت تازه میشه نشست و راجه به احد بودنش حرف زد

unfortunately I cannot respect the above statements. They are pillars of mental and as a result of that physical slavery of other human beings.
you wrote:
In be man rabti nadare. But again, human slavery is explained in many ways. Things are not simple as this, unless you have a very akhoondi way of thinking about issues.
I don't understand.

Are you saying you have stopped practising the 'philosophy or religion' of islam. or are you stating that namaz and hamd o sooreh be to rabti nadareh.

In the first case you are right what i wrote be to rabti nadare choon digeh een chiza ro reject kardi.
In the second case how can you be a muslim and the most important pillar of Islam be to rabti nadareh ?
could you explain that to me please.
 
Last edited:

Mahdi

Elite Member
Jan 1, 1970
6,999
497
Mjunik
#55
You really are just a worthless piece of shit.
a) good to have you back (naaa...actually not really)
b) none of your business
c) anyone who calls executions of 88/67 "an execution on MKO" as if that's what it was about, and one way or another plays it down, deserves nothing better
 

IranZamin

IPL Player
Feb 17, 2006
3,367
2
#56
anyone who calls executions of 88/67 "an execution on MKO" as if that's what it was about, and one way or another plays it down, deserves nothing better
Right. And what was your excuse the time you "asked him a question" with the exact same vulgar reference?

What was your excuse when you wished death on the children of people who didn't see the Trayvon case as you did (even though you would have taken the exact opposite side if the races were reversed)?

I've never even brought that 4p character's mother into an argument, and I hate everything about that hezbol.

Grow the hell up kid. Grow up.
 

Mahdi

Elite Member
Jan 1, 1970
6,999
497
Mjunik
#57
I'm terribly sorry that you're offended if I bring someone else's mom into an argument. Really sorry...won't happen again. Doesn't change the fact that that guy is a moron for treating one of the darkest events of the last 30 years like that, and you know it yourself.

I just tell people how I feel about them and their opinions. So if some people are happy that a moron like Zimmerman is found guilty after killing a kid, then I hope that they will feel similar about it once it happens to them as well. No excuses needed, I'm just being honest. Call it a strong case of empathy. But good that you bring that one up

What was your excuse when you wished death on the children of people who didn't see the Trayvon case as you did (even though you would have taken the exact opposite side if the races were reversed)?
After Trayvon Martin, two things have become clear: 1) Zimmerman is mentally unstable and has strong anger management issues. The police was called in twice, one by his estranged wife, then by his girlfriend. So it's pretty obvious to almost everyone now that a useless bastard like Zimmerman took away the life of a kid who had his future ahead of him.
2) After the Jordan Davis murder, it's pretty obvious to everyone that the stand-your-ground law is maybe a little bit problematic.

As for your usual assumptions on how I would react on a hypothetical case: no, I would react the same way as with Trayvon Martin if ever in a black gated community a white kid gets killed because some black moron wannabe cop believes the guy is about to burn the neighborhood down for the KKK because he carries a zippo lighter.

but me, you and everyone else know that this will never ever happen...so please keep your fantasy scenarios and don't bring them up as they are a waste of time. thanks.
 

Chinaski

Elite Member
Jun 14, 2005
12,269
352
#58
بابا تو هم حوصله داری مهدی. این آدم نیست که تو وقت صرفش می***کنی. یکی از رذل ترین و لجن ترین شخصیت های این سایت هست.
 

IranZamin

IPL Player
Feb 17, 2006
3,367
2
#59
I brought up the Zimmerman case to only point out your behavior there and I don't want to turn this thread into another debate on that topic, so I'll just repeat that you explicitly hoped people's kids would get killed, and I'm still not convinced your stance would have remained the same if races were reversed.

Having said that, I do see a rare encouraging sign of maturity in the first part of your post. So I'll end this with the hope that we'll have one more person here who understands that derailing threads and constant cat fights are not a substitute for honesty and assertiveness. Signing off for today.
 
Jun 18, 2005
10,889
5
#60
Interesting to see how Shabooon Bi Mokhe ISP AKA ChinaZanjiri is now buddies with Fugly Mahdi. I can totally see these two idiots getting together at Mahdi's parents basement and hack away at those keyboards. lol