Sri Lanka Bans Burqas and Niqabs One Week After Easter Bombings

I was raised agnostic /athiest ultra liberal Democrat andcwas not exposed to other ways of thinking until highschool.

DNA + upbringing does not equal the adult you become.

 

You are trying to compare an American way of life to that of a Muslim in a Muslim country.
apples and oranges.

 

It has **** all to do with lips ffs, it's to do with facial expressions. 'facial body-language' if you will??

 

Ah - good point.

 

Hell yes, **** them. I used to risk deadly flu by not wearing a hood when there was a subArctic blizzard because they were the epitome of gey. Now they're cool? **** them

They're like the hats turned backwards so all the convicts can put their faces up to the jailhouse bars, but mainly worn by Gangsta wannbes at the Mall with $770 sneakers

 

It's all gone very quiet in Sri Lanka so it looks like the 'praying at home' thang is working? You never know - it might catch on with all the other religiosos??

 

There is some major reasons : there is no christian country on earth to punish by death apostasy, homosexuality and blasphemy. There is a bunch of muslim country which do. Christian extremism is on controle. What isn't under controle in the west is the weapon manufacterer and globally the industries which are on indirect controle of the political life.

I'm not backpeddling. It's more complicated than that. I always make a distinction between gauls and ethnic french for a reason, because for instance corsican, caribbean french are ethnic french despite not being gauls. So there can be multiple ethnic groups in a same country. But they have all their traditionnal reigions.
However, I don't have any taste for purity of the bloodline, and I'm personnally ill placed to make such claims even if my very own bloodline could be claimed "pure", what matter for me is ancestry. I don't have any problem with sometimes some people of other ethnic group coming from elsewhere, at long he end to marry some locals and mix in the ethnic group in the end.
My ancestors are normans, some are vikings some are gallo-romans. You know what they understood ? If you want your group to be accepted, marry the locals. That's why vikings were so successfull, they never stayed away from the main ethnicity but integrate it quickly and adopted most of the local customs, even if they kept a few of their one.

I'm against any violence, and I don't have any sympathy for the white supremacist lunatics. I don't have any sympathy for any politicians, especially islamic religious one, but I'm absolutly against any racial slur or death threat. I won't express myself on the ethnic case of the USA because it has a very different ethnic paradigm than the old continent.

Great they managed those two to coexist, I heard about cases of the dane gobbling the chihuaha even if most of the time the chihuaha ended to die because the blue dane stomped him. If the example may be ill chosen, that doesn't change my point that there is things you can't make coexist : like driving on the left and on the right in the same time.

 

I said there are plenty of Christians who got similar idea's. That priest got a church.
https://www.facebook.com/Faithful-Word-Baptist-Church-183465927963/

Look at them happy smiling faces of them kids who are being indoctrinated that killing gays is god's will.
cute.

If your idea is that France is for the ethnic French, and not for the French Algerians.... than you're all for that pure white blood line.

Yeah... flying in 2 planes in buildings full with civilians is bad. Bombing a city full with buildings with civilians with nuclear bombs is good.

You're just making up fake news left and right here, champ. All for the sake to make a hate speech stick.

 

You go tell that to the Jews who got shot at in that Californian synagoge.

Ah... it's "complicated"... I don't "fully understand". End of the discussion... it still is France for the white French people and not them brown Algerian French people. That is what you explained. That is going for that pure white blood line.

You want that policy of deporting Muslims for being Muslims.
That is a violent. That is lunatic. That policy is what white supremacist like as well.

Let me get this clear: YOU... said yourself... that you favor ETHNIC CLEANSING.
It's a war crime! Just funny that you deny the labels that come with the likes of you.

That's what you get when you're ranting fake news.

 

I didn't follow that actuality, extremist christianity is more developped on USA than rest the world.
Still my point stand : there is no christian country punishing by death christian apostates or blasphemers. Most extreme christian country are in southern africa and punish homosexuality by prison, some christian states punish blaspheme by prison/fine, but none by death.

No. It's France for people with french ancestry, so yes France for gauls (historic white France), caribean french (historic brown french) or any people with french ancestry (a lot of mixed race people). It's a matter of ancestry, not phenotype.

And you want European to continue to accept that some muslims would regulary go on murder spree or sexual slavery network. You want them to accept the violence they endure, isn't it violence aswell ?
Violence will end to happen, people won't accept what they accept for now forever, so, I prefer to choose deportation over civil war. Between the two extreme, I prefer the lesser one. It's better to amputate a sick leg before the whole body get necrosis as a good doctor would do.

German were deported for a lot of places in the end of WW2 when the borders were re drawn without that being called a war crime, a lot of french were expelled from Algeria in 1963 without that being called a war crime. So no, population movement happen all the time without being called "ethnic cleansing".
Furthermore, muslim states don't have any problem to execute people who are blasphemers of Islam or apostates of Islam, isn't it a form of "ethnic" cleansing, if we consider "muslim" as an ethnic group, so we could consider "non-muslim" as an ethnic group aswell. And strangely, you have no problem with those kind of ethnic cleansing. Muslims doesn't have any problem with their prophet to torture a jew kinana for getting some gold. Furthermore Muhammed expulsed the Banu Nadir and Qunayqa from Arabia, let's not mention the slaughter of the Banu Quryza. And then you lecture me about human rights when you make the apology of a man ready to torture another man for some gold ?
That's one of the hugest hypocrisy of muslims, they either refer to human right declaration or to sha'riah according to what it favour them.

But you can't conciliate sha'riah and human right declaration.

The girls of telford and rotherham were raped and sexually enslaved, that's a war against mankind, the french population were regulary slaughtered because being french, the christian of Sri Lanka were slaughtered just for being christian, that's crime against mankind aswell. But those doesn't matter because you don't have empathy for everyone strangely.

What do you want ? That people get shot, raped without saying anything. What do you ask to christian of Sri Laknka ? Just accept to be murdered ? You don't have problem with violence when some specific population are targeted.

 

The Christian nations have BY FAR... the biggest weapons industry to massacre around. The amount they invest to massacre is unmatched. So you can whine about the iffy reasons all you want what Muslims do. It really compares horrible with the lies GWB made to massacre the people of Iraq. Currently the US supports Saudi Arabia,.. and because they are selling the military hardware means there is a genocide happening there as we speak... out of petty geo-political reasons.

but not Algerian French...
they are too brown.

I don't accept that. While you say you claim you are against violence... yet you're in full support t violently remove Muslims out of their houses. Maybe they should wear this yellow batch first on their clothes so you know who to deport. How about that as a tip? I dunno how you keep on denying you're not a white supremacist. What a joke.

You only say that because it was done by a Muslim. The next step is to claim they are all responsible, so you can justify your war criminal idea's. If a priest did this.... you would go like,.. meh, just an individual who should be punished.

 

Do they claim their religion demands they do such as a defense and justification for their actions?

If not, there is no comparison to be made.

 

I already gave you my opinion on that topic, Bush, Blair, Sarkozy and probably Obama deserve from my point of view to go to prison. The corruption of the elites by the financial-industry complexe around the "free" world isn't a big secret, but it's not the problem of christian extremism, it's the problem of corruption by huge companies.

No, they're muslims and not from french ancestry. The second problem is the lesser one, even if it's one. It's not a problem of being too much brown or any colour of ksin, french caribean are more brown.

I'm not a white supremacist because 1) I don't care of the colour of skin people. 2) I don't believe that white people are superior to the rest of mankind. 3) I don't think that white people have any right over the rest of the world, and at the opposite of many leftists, I don't think we have any right to enforce democracy or human right by violence.
If I would had to lead my country, I would probably organize propaganda to encourage people to do inter racial marriage, just to enable french people to form an united ethnic group again. Just that fact prevnet me to be a white supremacist as those people hate interracial union where I don't care.
Again, if I had to lead my country, I would probably leave them something like 2 or 3 years to organize themselves and leave the country and a financial help for them to make their hijra. I'm against any murder/rape/mutilation. Expulsion is for me an acceptable form of violence as long as it doesn't go with exactions as such we saw in Burma.

No, I think the same of the catholic authorities which covered up the rapes of children. They let a crime against mankind happen, there were not enough serious retaliation against catholic church authorities.

 

Thus proving that the American way is far superior and it should be our biggest export.

 

You mean someone with a hormone imbalance who grows a beard but is genetically female?

Or a transexual?

Lady with a deformity: not any more than talking to anyone else with a physical deformity or disability. Slight awkwardness.

Dude in a dress saying "I'm really a lady" : no more than dealing with your average crazy person.

If the face covered person was ranting about the moon ferrets or how they were going to subjugate me in the name of their deity, or wearing a bomb vest, that might make me uncomfortable. Just seeing one or having a generic conversation? Not so much.

 

You can get most of that from the eyes if you're worried about it.

Do you interact with masked persons with regular frequency?

 

The point is... That what is punishable with a death sentence in a Muslim nation does not compare well with massive massacre industry of the west.

And the Caribbean French are? lolol
What a load of nonsense.

You say all that, yet you support war criminal behavior of ethnic cleansing Muslims.
That doesn't compute with your denials.

 

So then you believe that the terrorists will let you know what their intent is? Interesting! You'll probably be the first person condemning Washington if a terrorist attack occurs for not taking precautions.

 

They tend to talk **** alot, yes. That's sort of the point.

The best precaution is to be armed.
I can do that where im at, it's not my fault the feds are idiotic tyrants in dc. Will I decry their disarming the populace? Yes.
Would that change if they also violated the establishment clause and banned Islam?
No.

 

For you the American way is the best because this is the culture you were raised in and you're part of. It's the same as the jihadists who feel their culture is the best because it's the one they were raised in. If you feel that exporting yours or rather imposing it on others because it's the right thing to do, wouldn't this mean that the jihadists also have a right to impose their culture on others - which by the way they are doing through terrorism, as we're also doing with bombs and sanctions.

 

Nope cause we are objectively correct and they are objectively wrong.

Life, liberty and property are the paramount human rights.

 

Which way of life holds that homosexuals and adulterers can be put to death? Which way of life holds that females are mere property?

 

Sri Lanka has just kicked out 200 islamic clerics...good riddance to 200 dregs of humanity...

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...islamic-clerics-after-easter-attacks-11505114

 

It's the clerics that are the real terrorists, both here and abroad.
Most Muslims know little about the religion, just what the clerics tell them.
But the clerics studied the books, they know what it is all about.

 

Courageous. But I was in Sri Lanka many years ago and didn't see a single burqa anyway. I guess things have changed. I do remember though that Moslem (Tamil) sections of the towns were considered potentially dangerous and the risk of getting ripped off were high there. Actually, I had two experiences that confirmed it.