Discussion in 'Current Events' started by LiddyRules, Mar 15, 2008.
They're beginning to learn from the West.
Here's a thought, STOP MURDERING INNOCENT PEOPLE IN THE NAME OF SOME KID TOUCHER, you fucktards.
Those aren't universal values. Only a total retard thinks that everyone loves tolerance and free speech. If that was true we'd all be crapping rainbows and no one would ever be murdered.
I'm sorry but I didn't see the part where they agreed to stop
murdering and mutilating people that don't agree with their religion.
the only problem with this idea is they are going to have to get jew lawyers if they ever want to win
I wish we had a thumbs up system for posts like this.
So instead of trying to eradicate freedom of speech and religion by using violence they're going to use lawsuits? Islam sucks camel cock. Fuck them, their religion, their pedo prophet and their imaginary god. Sue me shitdicks.
That about sums it up right there. :clap:
But they might stop murdering innocent people and just sue the pants off them.
I don't get these fucking people, it's like they can't have any joy in their lives.
"oh that woman's elbow is showing, better lop off her head."
Hey come on, Scientology does it.
and they do it well, but they have the jews working for them
But scientology isn't a real religion
Well, yeah, that too
Sue me, bitches!
Now there's an original thought!
And this too.
I don't think they get it yet.
Does anyone else noticed that the Islamic countries that don't have oil aren't nearly as anti-Western Who knew Bangladesh was 90 Muslim?
I'd have more respect for this move if they also denounced terrorism and violence wrongly done in Islam's name and will seek legal action toward those groups that do that.
Ya gotta wonder who's doing more damage to Islam? Some terrorists slamming airliners into crowded buildings full of innocent people in the name of Islam or some cartoon in Denmark?
But what do I know?
if by growing up you mean learning how to use the West's legal and political systems, then yes they are growing up. otherwise, not at all
That is what I meant. If they learn that frivolous lawsuits are the way to glory and not beheadings, they've easily jumped 300 years from where they are now.
This is exactly why the holocaust laws in parts of Europe are outrageous. it is now coming around to bite them in the ass because places like Germany cannot, in good conscious, dismiss any of this tiresome "Islam under attack" bullshit without looking like they're playing favorites.
Not growing up yet. Still blowing up from the looks of it.
the jihad demands all you're efforts to fight the infidel.it shouldnt surprise you guys that they will fight by pen as well as by sword.
Saudi billionaire's lawsuit leads to book's destruction
Khalid bin Mahfouz again. From WorldNetDaily.com (thanks to Davida):
Cambridge University Press has defaulted on a libel suit filed against it by a Saudi billionaire, issuing an apology, agreeing to pay court fees and damages and agreeing to destroy all unsold copies of a 2006 book by two American authors, as well as asking libraries to remove the book from their shelves.
In an apology published on its website, the academic publisher wrote:
"In 2006 Cambridge University Press published 'Alms for Jihad' written by J. Millard Burr and Robert O. Collins which made certain defamatory allegations about Sheikh Khalid Bin Mahfouz and his family in connection with the funding of terrorism.
"Whilst the allegations were originally published in good faith, Cambridge University Press now recognizes that the information upon which they were based was wrong. Cambridge University Press accepts that there is no truth whatsoever in these serious allegations."
Kevin Taylor, intellectual property director at Cambridge, told the Cambridge Evening News the company had agreed to pay out a "fairly small amount" in compensation.
He said three expert academics read books before they are published, and pay particular attention to those with controversial issues, but said, "unfortunately this one slipped through the net."
"We publish 1,500 academic books a year and take every effort to ensure this sort of thing does not happen," he said.
But the authors dispute the Cambridge claim of sloppy editing and Mahfouz's charge of libel, saying they mentioned the Saudi sheikh only 13 times in their book and they in no way labeled him a terrorist.
This is not the first time Mahfouz has used British courts to silence critics whose works have alleged links to terror funding.
Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum, said Mahfouz has successfully brought at least four prior lawsuits against authors. Cambridge University Press's apology, without making an effort to defend its authors in court, he said, has "ominous implications" into researching the financing of terrorism.