Jump to content
w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r

Indian Muslim Council resisting burial of Mumbai Muslim terrorists anywhere on Indian soil

By w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r in Off Topic

 Share

107 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Trumplestiltskin Grand Master

Trumplestiltskin   5,791

Posted
Filed: Other Country: United Kingdom
 Timeline
Posted
Yes - that would be Leo Strauss talking. How constitutions are symbolic and should be repealed if its deemed necessary. Needless to say its something I don't believe in.

I don't believe in repealing constitutions either. The home demolition policy does not violate

the constitutional rights of Israeli citizens, only those of foreign invaders.

That would be the trial-lawyers answer to the problem.

"One standard for me, another for you".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

KandD Community Regular

KandD   1

Posted
Filed: Lift. Cond. (apr) Country: Pakistan
 Timeline
Posted

I think it will be interesting to find out what they will actually do with the bodies . But a big :thumbs: for their rejection of being buried in a Muslim cemetery. These murderers are in fact terrorist , not Muslims.

OurTimeline

11/18/2007--------I-129F Petition mailed to CSC

11/29/2007--------NOA1

04/02/2008 --------NOA2 Approved (On my B-Day)

05/08/2008---------Forwarded to ISL

05/12/2008---------Consulate Received

05/22/2008---------Packet 3.5 Received by my Fiance

06/06/2008---------Packet 3.5 Returned to Embassy

06/19/2008---------Recieved Packet 4

06/25/2008---------Medical

07/08/2008---------Interview

03/06/2009---------Visa in Hand

03/23/2009---------POE Chicago

03/24/2009---------Marriage

08/05/2009---------GC in Mail

09/13/2009---------First Job in US

Naturalization

01/28/15------------mailed packet to USIS

02/06/15-------------NOA

02/27/15-------------Biometrics Appt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mawilson Grand Master

mawilson   2,133

Posted
Filed: Country: United Kingdom
 Timeline
Posted
Yes - that would be Leo Strauss talking. How constitutions are symbolic and should be repealed if its deemed necessary. Needless to say its something I don't believe in.

I don't believe in repealing constitutions either. The home demolition policy does not violate

the constitutional rights of Israeli citizens, only those of foreign invaders.

That would be the trial-lawyers answer to the problem.

"One standard for me, another for you".

Enemy combatants do not and should not have the same constitutional protections as citizens.

biden_pinhead.jpgspace.gifrolling-stones-american-flag-tongue.jpgspace.gifinside-geico.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ban Hammer Grand Master

Ban Hammer   13,346

Posted
Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
 Timeline
Posted
Yes - that would be Leo Strauss talking. How constitutions are symbolic and should be repealed if its deemed necessary. Needless to say its something I don't believe in.

I don't believe in repealing constitutions either. The home demolition policy does not violate

the constitutional rights of Israeli citizens, only those of foreign invaders.

That would be the trial-lawyers answer to the problem.

"One standard for me, another for you".

Enemy combatants do not and should not have the same constitutional protections as citizens.

actually, constitutional protections are not what governs the treatment of enemy combatants. :whistle:

* ~ * Charles * ~ *
 

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

 

USE THE REPORT BUTTON INSTEAD OF MESSAGING A MODERATOR!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
one...two...tree Grand Master

one...two...tree   2,762

Posted
Filed: Country: Philippines
 Timeline
Posted
Yes - that would be Leo Strauss talking. How constitutions are symbolic and should be repealed if its deemed necessary. Needless to say its something I don't believe in.

I don't believe in repealing constitutions either. The home demolition policy does not violate

the constitutional rights of Israeli citizens, only those of foreign invaders.

That would be the trial-lawyers answer to the problem.

"One standard for me, another for you".

Enemy combatants do not and should not have the same constitutional protections as citizens.

He's talking about annihilating the family as a strategic deterrent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
doodlebugg Mentor

doodlebugg   10

Posted
Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Egypt
 Timeline
Posted
I'm not saying it's the be-all and end-all solution, but if it helps prevent even a single attack, it's totally worth it.

That's not exactly something you can 'measure'

Demolishing the homes of terrorists' families has been Israel's policy for some time now,

and it's been very effective. It deters potential terrorists from carrying out attacks,

fearing harsh consequences for their family.

It *is* collective punishment and "illegal under international law" and whatever blah blah blah,

but it's effective.

So, let's say, for argument sake, that you have a brother/sister who seems to be headstrong about killing innocent civilians for whatever reason. Do you think it just that we flatten your home and kill whoever happens to be in it at the time?

I have two sisters. One is a whack job and the other is normal. I'd hate to be punished for what the whack job does all the time.

And if you think for one second that that policy deters potential terrorists I think you're very much mistaken. What it does is CREATE more terrorists because that 3 year old who watches his home be bulldozed and sees his mom and dad crying hysterically ON TOP of mourning their brother is going to be 16 someday and is going to want revenge.

Just sayin'.

I actually disagree with what they're doing by not allowing these people to be buried. Sure they are criminals but if we refused all Christian/Muslim/Jewish/insertreligionhere a proper burial in their appropriate cemetary we'd have streets full of dead people.

"Only from your heart can you touch the sky" - Rumi

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trumplestiltskin Grand Master

Trumplestiltskin   5,791

Posted
Filed: Other Country: United Kingdom
 Timeline
Posted
Yes - that would be Leo Strauss talking. How constitutions are symbolic and should be repealed if its deemed necessary. Needless to say its something I don't believe in.

I don't believe in repealing constitutions either. The home demolition policy does not violate

the constitutional rights of Israeli citizens, only those of foreign invaders.

That would be the trial-lawyers answer to the problem.

"One standard for me, another for you".

Enemy combatants do not and should not have the same constitutional protections as citizens.

So the "enemy combatant" designation should be applied to law-abiding citizens who happen to have a relative involved in a terrorist act?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
britty Proficient

britty   1

Posted
Filed: Lift. Cond. (pnd) Country: United Kingdom
 Timeline
Posted

Who cares really what they do with the bodies ?? The most important thing here is that they are dead. This is the result wanted and needed. Just leave their naked bodies somewhere remote and nature will take care of the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mawilson Grand Master

mawilson   2,133

Posted
Filed: Country: United Kingdom
 Timeline
Posted
Yes - that would be Leo Strauss talking. How constitutions are symbolic and should be repealed if its deemed necessary. Needless to say its something I don't believe in.

I don't believe in repealing constitutions either. The home demolition policy does not violate

the constitutional rights of Israeli citizens, only those of foreign invaders.

That would be the trial-lawyers answer to the problem.

"One standard for me, another for you".

Enemy combatants do not and should not have the same constitutional protections as citizens.

So the "enemy combatant" designation should be applied to law-abiding citizens who happen to have a relative involved in a terrorist act?

No, the combatant's family are "enemy civilians", not "enemy combatants". As citizens of

an enemy country, they can be presumed to owe allegiance to the enemy.

biden_pinhead.jpgspace.gifrolling-stones-american-flag-tongue.jpgspace.gifinside-geico.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trumplestiltskin Grand Master

Trumplestiltskin   5,791

Posted
Filed: Other Country: United Kingdom
 Timeline
Posted
Yes - that would be Leo Strauss talking. How constitutions are symbolic and should be repealed if its deemed necessary. Needless to say its something I don't believe in.

I don't believe in repealing constitutions either. The home demolition policy does not violate

the constitutional rights of Israeli citizens, only those of foreign invaders.

That would be the trial-lawyers answer to the problem.

"One standard for me, another for you".

Enemy combatants do not and should not have the same constitutional protections as citizens.

So the "enemy combatant" designation should be applied to law-abiding citizens who happen to have a relative involved in a terrorist act?

No, the combatant's family are "enemy civilians", not "enemy combatants". As citizens of

an enemy country, they can be presumed to owe allegiance to the enemy.

They can?

That's... nice.

Certainly its similar logic to that which the Military uses to explain away bad intel that results in the air-force bombing hospitals and civilian air raid shelters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ban Hammer Grand Master

Ban Hammer   13,346

Posted
Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
 Timeline
Posted
Yes - that would be Leo Strauss talking. How constitutions are symbolic and should be repealed if its deemed necessary. Needless to say its something I don't believe in.

I don't believe in repealing constitutions either. The home demolition policy does not violate

the constitutional rights of Israeli citizens, only those of foreign invaders.

That would be the trial-lawyers answer to the problem.

"One standard for me, another for you".

Enemy combatants do not and should not have the same constitutional protections as citizens.

So the "enemy combatant" designation should be applied to law-abiding citizens who happen to have a relative involved in a terrorist act?

No, the combatant's family are "enemy civilians", not "enemy combatants". As citizens of

an enemy country, they can be presumed to owe allegiance to the enemy.

:no: they are assumed to be neutral.

* ~ * Charles * ~ *
 

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

 

USE THE REPORT BUTTON INSTEAD OF MESSAGING A MODERATOR!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
doodlebugg Mentor

doodlebugg   10

Posted
Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Egypt
 Timeline
Posted
Yes - that would be Leo Strauss talking. How constitutions are symbolic and should be repealed if its deemed necessary. Needless to say its something I don't believe in.

I don't believe in repealing constitutions either. The home demolition policy does not violate

the constitutional rights of Israeli citizens, only those of foreign invaders.

That would be the trial-lawyers answer to the problem.

"One standard for me, another for you".

Enemy combatants do not and should not have the same constitutional protections as citizens.

So the "enemy combatant" designation should be applied to law-abiding citizens who happen to have a relative involved in a terrorist act?

No, the combatant's family are "enemy civilians", not "enemy combatants". As citizens of

an enemy country, they can be presumed to owe allegiance to the enemy.

What enemy country are we talking about here?

"Only from your heart can you touch the sky" - Rumi

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...