What a hypocrite though. So much for Osama and his "muslim values." He spent his nights masturbating to porn vids on his computer. I imagine the same hypocrisy pervades throughout Bin Laden's worshippers as well, including the ones on this website, who probably spend their nights the same way as Osama "limpdick" Bin Laden did. I bet they have to take viagra too. Freaks.
Posted from a similar thread: What a hypocrite though. So much for Osama and his "muslim values." He spent his nights masturbating to porn vids on his computer. I imagine the same hypocrisy pervades throughout Bin Laden's worshippers as well, including the ones on this website, who probably spend their nights the same way as Osama "the aged limpdick" Bin Laden did. I bet they have to take viagra too. Freaks.
Perhaps this news about the stash of porn is a fabrication, in an effort to portray OBL in a negative light, so as to justify the action of the US gvt. and his execution (?).
Agreed. It is disgusting to see the way these "religious" people treat women in places like Afganistan.
How so? We kept secret the news that we ourselves knew to be capable of ending the war - for many months, rejecting all opportunities for negotiation while many people both US and Japanese died. Then we announced it by killing hundreds of thousands of civilians - dropped the things right on top of hospitals and schools - without warning. Clearly some other agenda was in play, than merely ending the war. And saving lives wasn't even on the horizon. Yes, they do. As much as the 9/11 bombers did, anyway. Their targets were military and symbolic, physical centers of the violent oppression they fought against - legitimate targets of war, if the US were fighting that war. Understanding even - much less attempts at coherent or consistent description - is not justification. Obama was certainly a legitimate target of US violence, one who lived by the sword and has no complaint about his manner of death. But for us considering the news, information, etc, to simply believe what we are told by US official sources about his killing, life, etc, is inexcusably naive. Granted this is not the W administration, and we might hope for somewhat better as a little of the poison leaches, but reasonable people might want to just suspend evaluation of nuggets like "stash of porn" until some time has passed.
************* M*W: It's disgusting I know. I shouldn't post this racy photograph of Muslim women in swim suits. I can only imagine what their porn looks like. www.muslim-swimwear.com
What intel was that then? You are way fucking off here. The people in the Twin Towers were legimate targets??? These people oppress themselves with their women hating ways. If they freed their women and children's minds the so called oppression (I take it you refer to monetary power) would disappear as their societies grew stronger and richer.
i doubt it. not really gonna say why because it would be a stereotypical comment. but i wonder if it was western porn or saudi porn? do they have such a thing, or do they keep theirs covered up, and that's why they hate us so much, because we don't keep ours covered up, and they are compelled to look at it, and defiling themselves? i mean, in their own culture, they blame and punish the women for THEIR OWN sin. perhaps that's what they want to do to westerners too. it's OUR fault they're perverts.
Getting back on track, sort of, I have A Question For The Moderators: So, has any sort of consensus been reached on the matter of supporting curious/outrageous claims? Specifically, if one party makes such a claim and is asked, politely and directly and repeatedly, to support this claim, are sanctions to be issued for not accommodating? (I ask because there is historic precedent for moderators issuing time limits and whatnots for such things.) Here, the notion that OBL's purported possession of pornography (how do they know it was his? And more importantly, who fucking cares--other than pathetic ass-backwards Americans who like to disgrace and embarrass the rest of us?) is somehow evidence of his "hipocricy" or his not being "true to character" or some such thing has been introduced. The only evidence proffered to support this is a freakin' youtube link (?!?!)--oh, and a link to some other lame site which has absolutely nothing to do with OBL. So, wot's, uh, the deal?
For me, I always got that impression of him. I always thought 'There's a man, who is into hardcore shizer movies'. I am not sure where it came from. But the fact is my mates and I often made jokes just like this. Maybe I have powers of prescience?
BS On July 12, Foreign Minister Tōgō told the Soviets that: the Japanese Empire has no alternative but to fight on with all its strength for the honor and existence of the Motherland. So they weren't planning on surrendering even after Okinawa. On July 16th we had our first successful test of an Atomic bomb (Trinity) so there was no secret kept for months of this information. On July 26th we gave the Japanese the Potsdam Declaration, again asking for there surrender and we gave them some very generous assurances: " It was REJECTED. On August 6th, we dropped the first bomb on Hiroshima (12 days after Potsdam declaration was delivered and only 22 days since we knew the bomb would work). The next day Truman made this announcment warning of more atomic bombs if Japan did not surrender: Again the Japanese refused to surrender. And so on Aug 9th, we dropped our 2nd (and last) bomb on Nagasaki. On Aug 10th, after the two atomic bombs, the Japanese Foreign Ministry sent telegrams to the Allies announcing that Japan would accept the Potsdam Declaration There is no question that it took both bombs to end the war. There is no question that ending the war in this way saved many more Japanese lives than would have been lost in an invasion of the Mainland. Arthur
Did you really think we wouldn't look under the mattress? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Or http://www.smh.com.au/world/porn-found-in-bin-laden-home-20110514-1enfl.html So, no. It's not just one You Tube video.
The towers themselves, containing some of the war financing and economic support for (say) US military strongarming or Israel's abuse of its neighbors, were obviously legitimate targets for their actual roles - even disregarding the symbolism factor. The people in the towers - or the planes - were from that point of view simply at the wrong place and time. Something like the Japanese schoolchildren in Nagasaki in '45, the cluster-bombed Cambodian peasant families in the Plain of Jars in 1965, Khaddafy's family and domestics back in the 1986, wedding attendees in Afghanistan since '01, or any of many thousands of Iraqis in the years since 1992. War is hell, is the excuse. The normal procedure is for the larger, media controlling force to attempt to disparage, smear, make ugly the nature of the target, to remove sympathy and forestall criticism of the means employed - if a person, attempt to present them as of bad character in all respects.
Tsk, Tsk, Arthur--that's not what I was disputing, it was this: OBL denounced plenty of things, I simply don't recall pornography being one of them. Now Eichmann, on the other hand, did denounce pornography--he dismissed Nabokov's Lolita as "pornographic rubbish" or some such thing--and I would submit that as evidence of his hypocrisy.
Right. So I see you can't actually name a country we oppress then. Just people who aren't proper consumers. So I'm curious, for these people who don't hold a consumerist ideal of life as the highest, how exactly do we oppress them?
