source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,432502,00.html

Religious groups and free-speech advocates are banding together to
fight a United Nations resolution they say is being used to spread
Sharia law to the Western world and to intimidate anyone who
criticizes Islam.

The non-binding resolution on “Combating the Defamation of Religion”
is intended to curtail speech that offends religion -- particularly
Islam.

Pakistan and the Organization of the Islamic Conference introduced the
measure to the U.N. Human Rights Council in 1999. It was amended to
include religions other than Islam, and it has passed every year
since.

In 2005, Yemen successfully brought a similar resolution before the
General Assembly. Now the 192-nation Assembly is set to vote on it
again.

The non-binding Resolution 62/145, which was adopted in 2007, says it
“notes with deep concern the intensification of the campaign of
defamation of religions and the ethnic and religious profiling of
Muslim minorities in the aftermath of 11 September 2001.”

It “stresses the need to effectively combat defamation of all
religions and incitement to religious hatred, against Islam and
Muslims in particular.”

But some critics believe the resolution is a dangerous threat to
freedom of speech everywhere.

The U.S. government mission in Geneva, in a statement, told the U.N.
Human Rights Council in July that “defamation-related laws have been
abused by governments and used to restrict human rights” around the
world, and sometimes Westerners have been caught in the web.

Critics give some recent news events as examples of how the U.N.
"blasphemy resolution" has emboldened Islamic authorities and
threatened Westerners:

-- On Oct. 3 in Great Britain, three men were charged for plotting to
kill the publisher of the novel "The Jewel of Medina," which gives a
fictional account of the Prophet Muhammad and his child bride.
FOXNews.com reported U.S. publisher Random House Inc., was going to
release the book but stopped it from hitting shelves after it claimed
that “credible and unrelated sources” said the book could incite
violence by a “small, radical segment.”

-- An Afghan student is on death row for downloading an article about
the role of women in Islam, FOXNews.com also reported.

-- In December 2007 “a court reportedly sentenced two foreigners to
six months in prison for allegedly marketing a book deemed offensive
to Aisha, one of the Prophet Muhammad's wives,” the U.S. government
said.

-- A British teacher was sentenced to 15 days in jail in Sudan for
offending Islam by allowing students to name the class teddy bear
Muhammad in November 2007.

-- In February 2007 in Egypt an Internet blogger was sentenced to four
years in prison for writing a post that critiqued Islam.

-- In 2004, Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh was murdered after the
release of his documentary highlighting the abuse of Muslim women.

“It’s obviously intended to have an intimidating effect on people
expressing criticism of radical Islam, and the idea that you can have
a defamation of a religion like this, I think, is a concept
fundamentally foreign to our system of free expression in the United
States,” said former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton.

Passing the resolution year after year gives it clout, Bolton said.
“In places where U.N. decisions are viewed as more consequential than
they are in the U.S., they’re trying to build up brick-by-brick that
disagreement with this resolution is unacceptable.”

Kevin “Shamus” Hasson, founder and president of the Becket Fund for
Religious Liberty, a public interest law firm in Washington that
opposes the resolution, said it is a slap in the face of human rights
law.

“The whole idea of the defamation of religion is a Trojan horse for
something else," Hasson said. "When you talk about defamation, you
talk about people being defamed and people being libeled, but ideas
can’t be defamed. Ideas don’t have rights, people have rights.”

He said the resolution is a shield for Islamic fundamentalists who
retaliate against perceived offenses and want to make Islamic Sharia
law the law of the land. He said the resolution passes under the guise
of protecting religion, but it actually endangers religious minorities
in Islamic countries.

“Who could possibly be in favor of defamation?” Hasson said. “God may
well punish blasphemy in the hereafter, but it’s not the government’s
job to police in the here and now.”

Paula Schriefer, advocacy director for Freedom House, a member of the
Coalition to Defend Free Speech, agrees.

“You have to remember that many of the governments that are pushing
forward this idea are not democratic governments,” she said. “Citizens
of Pakistan or Egypt, who have been two of the ringleaders of this
movement, are frequently put in prison or arrested. Even if they’re
not arrested, the fear of being arrested creates an environment of
self-censorship.”

Floyd Abrams, Visiting Professor of First Amendment Law at the
Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, said that while Americans are
protected by the Constitution at home, the U.N. resolution could
affect those who travel to countries with anti-free-speech laws and
isolate Westerners who oppose restricting religious dialogue.

Neither the Pakistani, the Indonesian nor the Egyptian missions to the
U.N. responded to requests for comment. All three are members of the
Organization of the Islamic Conference.

pox spews...?...
when will freaks like you upgrade to higher quality journalism, like the 
national enquirer...?...

"klunk"  wrote in message 
news:lOHFk.13829$aM2.4485@newsfe10.iad...
> pox spews...?...
> when will freaks like you upgrade to higher quality journalism, like the 
> national enquirer...?...

But is the story true?

Here it is again:

"Religious groups and free-speech advocates are banding together to
fight a United Nations resolution they say is being used to spread
Sharia law to the Western world and to intimidate anyone who
criticizes Islam.

The non-binding resolution on "Combating the Defamation of Religion"
is intended to curtail speech that offends religion -- particularly
Islam.

Pakistan and the Organization of the Islamic Conference introduced the
measure to the U.N. Human Rights Council in 1999. It was amended to
include religions other than Islam, and it has passed every year
since.

In 2005, Yemen successfully brought a similar resolution before the
General Assembly. Now the 192-nation Assembly is set to vote on it
again.

The non-binding Resolution 62/145, which was adopted in 2007, says it
"notes with deep concern the intensification of the campaign of
defamation of religions and the ethnic and religious profiling of
Muslim minorities in the aftermath of 11 September 2001."

It "stresses the need to effectively combat defamation of all
religions and incitement to religious hatred, against Islam and
Muslims in particular."

But some critics believe the resolution is a dangerous threat to
freedom of speech everywhere.

The U.S. government mission in Geneva, in a statement, told the U.N.
Human Rights Council in July that "defamation-related laws have been
abused by governments and used to restrict human rights" around the
world, and sometimes Westerners have been caught in the web.

Critics give some recent news events as examples of how the U.N.
"blasphemy resolution" has emboldened Islamic authorities and
threatened Westerners:

-- On Oct. 3 in Great Britain, three men were charged for plotting to
kill the publisher of the novel "The Jewel of Medina," which gives a
fictional account of the Prophet Muhammad and his child bride.
FOXNews.com reported U.S. publisher Random House Inc., was going to
release the book but stopped it from hitting shelves after it claimed
that "credible and unrelated sources" said the book could incite
violence by a "small, radical segment."

-- An Afghan student is on death row for downloading an article about
the role of women in Islam, FOXNews.com also reported.

-- In December 2007 "a court reportedly sentenced two foreigners to
six months in prison for allegedly marketing a book deemed offensive
to Aisha, one of the Prophet Muhammad's wives," the U.S. government
said.

-- A British teacher was sentenced to 15 days in jail in Sudan for
offending Islam by allowing students to name the class teddy bear
Muhammad in November 2007.

-- In February 2007 in Egypt an Internet blogger was sentenced to four
years in prison for writing a post that critiqued Islam.

-- In 2004, Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh was murdered after the
release of his documentary highlighting the abuse of Muslim women.

"It's obviously intended to have an intimidating effect on people
expressing criticism of radical Islam, and the idea that you can have
a defamation of a religion like this, I think, is a concept
fundamentally foreign to our system of free expression in the United
States," said former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton.

Passing the resolution year after year gives it clout, Bolton said.
"In places where U.N. decisions are viewed as more consequential than
they are in the U.S., they're trying to build up brick-by-brick that
disagreement with this resolution is unacceptable."

Kevin "Shamus" Hasson, founder and president of the Becket Fund for
Religious Liberty, a public interest law firm in Washington that
opposes the resolution, said it is a slap in the face of human rights
law.

"The whole idea of the defamation of religion is a Trojan horse for
something else," Hasson said. "When you talk about defamation, you
talk about people being defamed and people being libeled, but ideas
can't be defamed. Ideas don't have rights, people have rights."

He said the resolution is a shield for Islamic fundamentalists who
retaliate against perceived offenses and want to make Islamic Sharia
law the law of the land. He said the resolution passes under the guise
of protecting religion, but it actually endangers religious minorities
in Islamic countries.

"Who could possibly be in favor of defamation?" Hasson said. "God may
well punish blasphemy in the hereafter, but it's not the government's
job to police in the here and now."

Paula Schriefer, advocacy director for Freedom House, a member of the
Coalition to Defend Free Speech, agrees.

"You have to remember that many of the governments that are pushing
forward this idea are not democratic governments," she said. "Citizens
of Pakistan or Egypt, who have been two of the ringleaders of this
movement, are frequently put in prison or arrested. Even if they're
not arrested, the fear of being arrested creates an environment of
self-censorship."

Floyd Abrams, Visiting Professor of First Amendment Law at the
Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, said that while Americans are
protected by the Constitution at home, the U.N. resolution could
affect those who travel to countries with anti-free-speech laws and
isolate Westerners who oppose restricting religious dialogue.

Neither the Pakistani, the Indonesian nor the Egyptian missions to the
U.N. responded to requests for comment. All three are members of the
Organization of the Islamic Conference."

"klunk"  wrote in message 
news:lOHFk.13829$aM2.4485@newsfe10.iad...
> pox spews...?...
> when will freaks like you upgrade to higher quality journalism, like the 
> national enquirer...?...
>
>

Can't debate the facts eh, muslime pig fucker?

I had Christian stalkers outside my house yesterday!

I wiped my arse with the kleenex brand soft toilet tissue--the
Labrador's favorite.

It was at that point, that this particular prayer group dispersed.

- dolf

- http://www.grapple.id.au/Chronicles/aboutDolf.html


Rodney: "You track my posts across the groups, you respond to me in this 
group by slandering me, then you begin the slander and insults again 
just because I posted at all ?? And I'm not supposed to believe that 
you've been stalking me for some ungodly purpose ? How about your 
response to Pat (thewaytoheaven@webtv.net) in another group, when he was 
trying to speak to me. Did Pat or I invite you to step in and slander 
me? No, you volunteered to do it because you're a malcontent, a hate 
monger and a chronic trouble maker. Of course, as in the other post so 
in this one. I am entitled to my opinion. Oh yes, I still have your 
emails and the headers, I'll bet that you don't!

dolf: "I had Christian stalkers outside my house yesterday!

I wiped my arse with the kleenex brand soft toilet tissue--the 
Labrador's favorite. It was at that point, that this particular prayer 
group dispersed."

"And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, 
but anyone who blasphemes against Andrew B. Chung will not be forgiven." 
[Rodney]

dolf: "This sense of stalking involves the unauthorised use as retrieval 
of newsgroup posts associated to my development of the GRAPPLE paradigm 
which is reflected on my personal and private www-page as copyright 
material.

Tools which are capable of monitoring, facilitating and generating these 
feelings by illuminating different aspects of the chosen population or 
individual by deploying a mirrored blog site such as AMAZON.COM (This 
account has since been closed as abuse and a violation of trust by this 
company) which is then used for counter containment activity against the 
collective neurological perceptions obtained from Internet blogs 
including LiveJournal, MSN Spaces, MySpace, Blogger, Flickr, Technorati, 
Feedster, Ice Rocket, and Google sources. Jonathon Harris and Sepandar 
Kamvar's May 2006 deployment of the '.WE FEEL FINE' which identifies (in 
close to realtime with its 10 minute delay) key fluctuations in 
emotional behaviour including:

The Madness movement: with its network of many tiny colorful particles, 
was designed to echo the human world. Seen from afar, Madness presents a 
massive number of individual particles, each colored and sized uniquely, 
each flying wildly around the screen, proclaiming its own individuality. 
At this level, Madness presents a bird's eye view of humanity – like 
standing atop a skyscraper and peering down at the street. People bustle 
to and fro, darting in and out of shops, hailing taxis, falling in love, 
laughing, handling personal crises. From the skyscraper, the people 
below are like ants – their words cannot be heard, their facial features 
cannot be seen, and the notion of individuality is hard to recognize. At 
this level, each particle seems insignificant.

Murmurs: the second movement, presents a highly structured environment 
in which to view human feelings. As this movement begins, every particle 
on screen gently floats upwards, eventually bouncing off the ceiling 
several times before settling. Then, one by one, the particles are 
excused from their attraction to the ceiling in order to join a simple 
scrolling list of human feelings, organized in reverse chronological 
order. The sentences appear letter by letter, as if being typed by their 
author, and fade to black as new sentences appear. At any one time, 
around ten sentences can be seen on screen. The strict formal 
constraints of Murmurs help to emphasize the gaping polarities in the 
types of feelings present in the world.

Montage: the third movement, was created to answer questions like: what 
does sadness look like? Happiness? Loneliness? Montage presents the 
feelings from a given population that contain photographs, and displays 
these photographs in a simple grid of variable size, depending on the 
number of photographs available.

Mobs: the fourth movement, consists of five smaller movements, each of 
which utilizes a self-organizing particle system to configure its shape, 
color, distribution and physics to best express the different zeitgeists 
of: feeling, gender, age, weather, and geographical location. Mobs 
(Feeling) displays the most common feelings in the sample population.

Metrics: the fifth movement, consists of five smaller movements. Whereas 
Mobs expresses the notion of “Most Common”, Metrics expresses the notion 
of “Most Salient”. A full discussion of the difference between “Most 
Common” and “Most Salient” is here. Essentially, the traits listed in 
Metrics are those that best distinguish the sample population from the 
global average (ie. how is this population different?). Metrics displays 
the most representative traits of the sample population, along five 
axes: feeling, gender, age, weather, and location.

Mounds: the sixth and final movement, is independent of the sample 
population, always displaying every feeling in our database, scaled and 
sorted in order of frequency. Each feeling is portrayed as a large 
bulbous mound, colored to correspond to the feeling it represents. The 
mounds jiggle slightly when undisturbed, and bend away as the mouse 
cursor approaches their perimeter.
The Panel allows the viewer to control the sample population on screen 
at any one time. At all times, the red bar atop the screen presents a 
concise summary of the current sample population. Clicking that red bar 
causes the panel to open, and within the panel, viewers can constrain 
the population along any combination of the following axes: Feeling 
(happy, sad, depressed, etc.) Age (in ten year increments - 20s, 30s, 
etc.) Gender (male or female) Weather (sunny, cloudy, rainy, or snowy) 
Location (country, state, and/or city) Date (year, month, and/or day) 
When satisfied, the viewer can press “Find Feelings” and We Feel Fine 
will retrieve any matching feelings from our database. Because of web 
browser limitations (the applet is highly CPU intensive), we limit the 
maximum number of feelings returned at any one time to 1,500 (on PCs) 
and 1,000 (on Macs). [Source: .WE FEEL FINE]

I believe this unauthorised trawling and the unregulated, unrestained 
and unethical uses of this technology may be put to by media, 
entertainment, sporting and government agencies, may constitute an abuse 
of my private autonomic right to Intellectual Property under the 
Commonwealth of Australia (the letters patent to which in 1900 is 
superior to the telephone technological patent awarded in 1876) and a 
violation of my human, religious and constitutional rights -- for which 
a complaint will be made to the Police.

Rodney: "Pat, I'm sure that you are a very nice person, but until I see 
some proof of God as existing, I'm going to ignore the preaching and the 
death threats that tend to emanate from him and some of his followers."

Pat: "OK, if hell can't be scared out of you, then the proof of God's 
existence is when you sincerely turn to Him wanting to see Him change 
you, with you having a heart that wants to repent, then HE WILL CHANGE 
YOU and that is the proof that He exists."

Rodney: "On the chance that you might want to understand the reasoning 
behind this decision, here it is, itemized below for you out of 
courtesy.. 1. I can't find it in me to love or respect someone that 
wants to kill me if I do not love him and / or adore him. That is 
extortion, and it isn't received well by anyone."

Pat: "You don't have to love and adore Him 1st in order to get saved. 
That will come later when you see how He changes your life. Extortion is 
swindling and cheating, and God does not do that because the basis for 
you having to love and adore him 1st is not true."

Rodney: "2. Andrew says that God demands that we believe in him and 
proclaim Jesus is LORD by the Holy Spirit. Andrew also claims that the 
words Jesus is LORD can only be spoken via the Holy Spirit, yet here I 
am an unbeliever speaking those very words and believing NOT a bit of it."

Pat: "I don't care what this Andrew says. Don't be an unbeliever just 
because of what 1 person says."

Rodney: "Bottom line Pat...some of your Christian brothers are full of 
crap and fakes in a big way."

Nous:	61
Time:	03:25 (24 hrs)
Date:	12 May, 2008
Torah:	#5 #8 #300 %81 = #70
Tao:	Virtuosity at Using 'Beneath'/ Virtue of Humility
I-Ching:	H64 - Before Completion
Tetra:	#78 - On the Verge
  	
Myth:	Latin: Salvator {Concealed God} Alt: Yarahel {Archery of God} {
1. HELPS THOSE WHO WISH TO KNOW THE OCCULT MYSTERIES & NATURE'S SECRETS
2. CHEMISTRY
3. THE ABSTRACT SCIENCES, THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE & UNIVERSAL PHYSIC
4. Sesme
} Solar Eclipse 4 December 2002 + 28 years

- ttp://www.grapple.id.au/angels.html?nous=261

simple.language.yahoo@gmail.com wrote:
> source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,432502,00.html
> 
> Religious groups and free-speech advocates are banding together to
> fight a United Nations resolution they say is being used to spread
> Sharia law to the Western world and to intimidate anyone who
> criticizes Islam.
> 
> The non-binding resolution on “Combating the Defamation of Religion”
> is intended to curtail speech that offends religion -- particularly
> Islam.
> 
> Pakistan and the Organization of the Islamic Conference introduced the
> measure to the U.N. Human Rights Council in 1999. It was amended to
> include religions other than Islam, and it has passed every year
> since.
> 
> In 2005, Yemen successfully brought a similar resolution before the
> General Assembly. Now the 192-nation Assembly is set to vote on it
> again.
> 
> The non-binding Resolution 62/145, which was adopted in 2007, says it
> “notes with deep concern the intensification of the campaign of
> defamation of religions and the ethnic and religious profiling of
> Muslim minorities in the aftermath of 11 September 2001.”
> 
> It “stresses the need to effectively combat defamation of all
> religions and incitement to religious hatred, against Islam and
> Muslims in particular.”
> 
> But some critics believe the resolution is a dangerous threat to
> freedom of speech everywhere.
> 
> The U.S. government mission in Geneva, in a statement, told the U.N.
> Human Rights Council in July that “defamation-related laws have been
> abused by governments and used to restrict human rights” around the
> world, and sometimes Westerners have been caught in the web.
> 
> Critics give some recent news events as examples of how the U.N.
> "blasphemy resolution" has emboldened Islamic authorities and
> threatened Westerners:
> 
> -- On Oct. 3 in Great Britain, three men were charged for plotting to
> kill the publisher of the novel "The Jewel of Medina," which gives a
> fictional account of the Prophet Muhammad and his child bride.
> FOXNews.com reported U.S. publisher Random House Inc., was going to
> release the book but stopped it from hitting shelves after it claimed
> that “credible and unrelated sources” said the book could incite
> violence by a “small, radical segment.”
> 
> -- An Afghan student is on death row for downloading an article about
> the role of women in Islam, FOXNews.com also reported.
> 
> -- In December 2007 “a court reportedly sentenced two foreigners to
> six months in prison for allegedly marketing a book deemed offensive
> to Aisha, one of the Prophet Muhammad's wives,” the U.S. government
> said.
> 
> -- A British teacher was sentenced to 15 days in jail in Sudan for
> offending Islam by allowing students to name the class teddy bear
> Muhammad in November 2007.
> 
> -- In February 2007 in Egypt an Internet blogger was sentenced to four
> years in prison for writing a post that critiqued Islam.
> 
> -- In 2004, Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh was murdered after the
> release of his documentary highlighting the abuse of Muslim women.
> 
> “It’s obviously intended to have an intimidating effect on people
> expressing criticism of radical Islam, and the idea that you can have
> a defamation of a religion like this, I think, is a concept
> fundamentally foreign to our system of free expression in the United
> States,” said former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton.
> 
> Passing the resolution year after year gives it clout, Bolton said.
> “In places where U.N. decisions are viewed as more consequential than
> they are in the U.S., they’re trying to build up brick-by-brick that
> disagreement with this resolution is unacceptable.”
> 
> Kevin “Shamus” Hasson, founder and president of the Becket Fund for
> Religious Liberty, a public interest law firm in Washington that
> opposes the resolution, said it is a slap in the face of human rights
> law.
> 
> “The whole idea of the defamation of religion is a Trojan horse for
> something else," Hasson said. "When you talk about defamation, you
> talk about people being defamed and people being libeled, but ideas
> can’t be defamed. Ideas don’t have rights, people have rights.”
> 
> He said the resolution is a shield for Islamic fundamentalists who
> retaliate against perceived offenses and want to make Islamic Sharia
> law the law of the land. He said the resolution passes under the guise
> of protecting religion, but it actually endangers religious minorities
> in Islamic countries.
> 
> “Who could possibly be in favor of defamation?” Hasson said. “God may
> well punish blasphemy in the hereafter, but it’s not the government’s
> job to police in the here and now.”
> 
> Paula Schriefer, advocacy director for Freedom House, a member of the
> Coalition to Defend Free Speech, agrees.
> 
> “You have to remember that many of the governments that are pushing
> forward this idea are not democratic governments,” she said. “Citizens
> of Pakistan or Egypt, who have been two of the ringleaders of this
> movement, are frequently put in prison or arrested. Even if they’re
> not arrested, the fear of being arrested creates an environment of
> self-censorship.”
> 
> Floyd Abrams, Visiting Professor of First Amendment Law at the
> Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, said that while Americans are
> protected by the Constitution at home, the U.N. resolution could
> affect those who travel to countries with anti-free-speech laws and
> isolate Westerners who oppose restricting religious dialogue.
> 
> Neither the Pakistani, the Indonesian nor the Egyptian missions to the
> U.N. responded to requests for comment. All three are members of the
> Organization of the Islamic Conference.

On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 23:50:46 +0000, dolf wrote:

[snip - extremely verbose and completely nonsensical drivel]

Dolf, why do you cross post such verbose garbage? into nz.general?

Don't reply to that. Just think about it and then DON'T DO IT AGAIN!

Be told!!


-- 
Dilger: "Microsoft is first and foremost a marketing
company that flogs third rate technology products."

On 5 Oct 2008 17:13:43 +1300, somebody claiming to be Carnations
(Beautiful@Carnations.com) sprouted forth in
pan.2008.10.05.04.15.17@carnations.com:-

>Dolf, why do you cross post such verbose garbage? into nz.general?
>
>Don't reply to that. Just think about it and then DON'T DO IT AGAIN!
>
>Be told!!

Dolt cannot be told.  The medications simply aren't working.

On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 03:16:01 -0700 (PDT),
simple.language.yahoo@gmail.com wrote:

>-- On Oct. 3 in Great Britain, three men were charged for plotting to
>kill the publisher of the novel "The Jewel of Medina," which gives a
>fictional account of the Prophet Muhammad and his child bride.
>FOXNews.com reported U.S. publisher Random House Inc., was going to
>release the book but stopped it from hitting shelves after it claimed
>that “credible and unrelated sources” said the book could incite
>violence by a “small, radical segment.”

What gives them the idea that resolution played any role in the plans
of those men?

In news:pan.2008.10.05.04.15.17@carnations.com Carnations
 wrote: 

> [snip - extremely verbose and completely nonsensical drivel]

Your newsreader has a kill file or a filter; learn to use it.

-- 
Bert Hyman	St. Paul, MN	bert@iphouse.com

"±DoügßÇ"  wrote in message 
news:5KPFk.2373$ZP4.2271@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
> "klunk"  wrote in message 
> news:lOHFk.13829$aM2.4485@newsfe10.iad...
>> pox spews...?...
>> when will freaks like you upgrade to higher quality journalism, like the 
>> national enquirer...?...
>>
>>
>
> Can't debate the facts eh, muslime pig fucker?

lol... not if parroting bigoted stupidity is what you consider "debating 
facts"....  ;-)

"klunk"  wrote in message 
news:5QCJk.507$_B6.475@newsfe12.iad...
>
>
> "±DoügßÇ"  wrote in message 
> news:5KPFk.2373$ZP4.2271@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> "klunk"  wrote in message 
>> news:lOHFk.13829$aM2.4485@newsfe10.iad...
>>> pox spews...?...
>>> when will freaks like you upgrade to higher quality journalism, like the 
>>> national enquirer...?...
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Can't debate the facts eh, muslime pig fucker?
>
> lol... not if parroting bigoted stupidity is what you consider "debating 
> facts"....  ;-)

He copies your style!

"klunk"  wrote in message 
news:5QCJk.507$_B6.475@newsfe12.iad...
>
>
> "±DoügßÇ"  wrote in message 
> news:5KPFk.2373$ZP4.2271@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> "klunk"  wrote in message 
>> news:lOHFk.13829$aM2.4485@newsfe10.iad...
>>> pox spews...?...
>>> when will freaks like you upgrade to higher quality journalism, like the 
>>> national enquirer...?...
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Can't debate the facts eh, muslime pig fucker?
>
> lol... not if parroting bigoted stupidity is what you consider "debating 
> facts"....  ;-)
>

Once again, you've proved you can't debate the facts, muslime
pig.

"John Bennett"  wrote in message 
news:LcSdnZFvVqmQu2rVnZ2dnUVZ8uqdnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "klunk"  wrote in message 
> news:5QCJk.507$_B6.475@newsfe12.iad...
>>
>>
>> "±DoügßÇ"  wrote in message 
>> news:5KPFk.2373$ZP4.2271@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>> "klunk"  wrote in message 
>>> news:lOHFk.13829$aM2.4485@newsfe10.iad...
>>>> pox spews...?...
>>>> when will freaks like you upgrade to higher quality journalism, like 
>>>> the national enquirer...?...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can't debate the facts eh, muslime pig fucker?
>>
>> lol... not if parroting bigoted stupidity is what you consider "debating 
>> facts"....  ;-)
>
> He copies your style!

Not really idjit.

"±DoügßÇ"  wrote in message 
news:IUdKk.3793$as4.3390@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
> "klunk"  wrote in message 
> news:5QCJk.507$_B6.475@newsfe12.iad...
>>
>>
>> "±DoügßÇ"  wrote in message 
>> news:5KPFk.2373$ZP4.2271@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>> "klunk"  wrote in message 
>>> news:lOHFk.13829$aM2.4485@newsfe10.iad...
>>>> pox spews...?...
>>>> when will freaks like you upgrade to higher quality journalism, like 
>>>> the national enquirer...?...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can't debate the facts eh, muslime pig fucker?
>>
>> lol... not if parroting bigoted stupidity is what you consider "debating 
>> facts"....  ;-)
>>
>
> Once again, you've proved you can't debate the facts, muslime
> pig.

lol... and once again dog, you present an abysmal lack of facts... ;-)

"±DoügßÇ"  wrote in message 
news:UUdKk.3794$as4.3178@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
> "John Bennett"  wrote in message 
> news:LcSdnZFvVqmQu2rVnZ2dnUVZ8uqdnZ2d@bt.com...
>>
>> "klunk"  wrote in message 
>> news:5QCJk.507$_B6.475@newsfe12.iad...
>>>
>>>
>>> "±DoügßÇ"  wrote in message 
>>> news:5KPFk.2373$ZP4.2271@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>>> "klunk"  wrote in message 
>>>> news:lOHFk.13829$aM2.4485@newsfe10.iad...
>>>>> pox spews...?...
>>>>> when will freaks like you upgrade to higher quality journalism, like 
>>>>> the national enquirer...?...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can't debate the facts eh, muslime pig fucker?
>>>
>>> lol... not if parroting bigoted stupidity is what you consider "debating 
>>> facts"....  ;-)
>>
>> He copies your style!
>
> Not really idjit.

true... you've appropriated my spelling, idjit.... ;-)

"John Bennett"  wrote in message 
news:LcSdnZFvVqmQu2rVnZ2dnUVZ8uqdnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "klunk"  wrote in message 
> news:5QCJk.507$_B6.475@newsfe12.iad...
>>
>>
>> "±DoügßÇ"  wrote in message 
>> news:5KPFk.2373$ZP4.2271@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>> "klunk"  wrote in message 
>>> news:lOHFk.13829$aM2.4485@newsfe10.iad...
>>>> pox spews...?...
>>>> when will freaks like you upgrade to higher quality journalism, like 
>>>> the national enquirer...?...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can't debate the facts eh, muslime pig fucker?
>>
>> lol... not if parroting bigoted stupidity is what you consider "debating 
>> facts"....  ;-)
>
> He copies your style!

whereas yours appears to be limited to childish one-lined quips... good job, 
troll... ;-)