Pages: 1 … 3 4 5

 

2007-08-04 10:34:24
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6652|USA

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:


It's apt I tell you - APT!
Then you have run out of reasonable arguments if you are left with comparing me to this.
Not at all.

I'm making the comparison because it is obvious that you don't see it. I would've been shocked if you had. But it is perfectly apt. I'm not saying you're evil - just delusional and misguided.

I'll go through point by point showing how apt it is, after I've had something to eat.
Spare me the lecture, I know what you are accusing me of, I am simply not agreeing with it. I am not a sheep blindly following my leaders, I am not saying lets kill the Muslims because they are what wrong with our society or they are ruining our society. Or lets ship them off to ghettoes and we can figure out how to dispose of them later. I do not endorse genicide, or the singling out of any one group of people for any reason.

I am simply asking, why the appeasement of the Muslims?? What are YOU afraid of, if not them turning into extremists, which has already been suggested by posters on your side of the debate? What other groups have you singles out for special needs training in hopes that you can sooth their feathers?
2007-08-04 10:38:50
mikkel
Member
+383|6602

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

YOur ramblings have missed itsa mark:

you will no doubt dismiss every quote I or anyone else will post to support our opinions. I then said you will quote a single man ( in this case I used Bush) to prove a point. I used Bush as an example nothing more, so put away your cry rag and your pitty, because it isn't needed.
I think you need to be somewhat more eloquent, instead of typing one thing and meaning a completely different thing. If you kept doing that, one might think that you were actually backpedaling.

No doubt I will dismiss anything anyone posts, because.. uh.. what exactly is it that leads you to believe that? I'd respond in depth to this if it was based even on a failed assumption, but it being pulled out of absolutely nowhere with no substantiating evidence, I really do not know where to begin.

lowing wrote:

It is very hard to quote anything except a single man. SO the now the question will then be, how many quotes from how many different people are needed before you will not dismiss the argument before you?
If it's very hard for you to quote anything except the subjective opinions of a single muslim when discussing muslims in general, I don't think you're quite ready to debate this topic yet. If all you can think of to substantiate that opinion as commonly held amongst muslims is posting more subjective opinions from muslim individials, I don't think you really know how to argue your case. I could find 20 people in the US who believe that they could eat the moon, was it close enough, and post their testimonies. That does not mean that all Americans believe that they could eat the moon.

Until you can provide anything that substantiates the alleged ubiquity of this sentiment, you shouldn't be surprised that people dismiss what you say as being irrelevant and insubstantial, because anything less than that is both.

lowing wrote:

Can you please tell me about any other groups of people in your country you are trying to appease so they don't blow your shit up? Surely in the world, their are more than just Muslims who go unappreciated by us that need attention before they kill our women and children.
We aren't trying to appease any group that threatens to "blow out shit up". We jail those people. Who we -are- trying to work things out with are regular, moderate muslims who face racial and religious discrimination and social stigma. The world isn't black and white. People like you who think that are dangerously ignorant.
Nice debate tactic, spend a page NOT debating anything, just dismiss your opponant as not worth debating or too ignorant for you to be bothered with. I will try that next time I can not come up with an argument. I will also bombard them with condensending insult after insult.
Heh, let's see it from the other side, the one that you seem so incapable of realising exists. Could it possibly be that dismissing your irrelevant arguments has something to do with the fact that they're, well, irrelevant, and that in this entire page, you haven't actually presented anything substantial to support your case?

Your general MO seems to be trying a shaky argument full of flaws, and when it fails, you turn the problem of your inadequate argument into the problem of your opposition rightfully dismissing it, and you do it through broad and inapplicable generalisations and claims that are all pulled out of nowhere, but are somehow supposed to discredit the opinions of the people you argue against.

I don't think anyone reading this thread is blind to the fact that you have absolutely no argument going, and you're resorting to these circular, ad hominem logical fallacies to try to make you feel better about yourself by hoping to drag the debate just off topic enough for you to feel no need to concede anything. Have fun with that.


lowing wrote:

It has been argued by people form "your side" that you are attempting to listen to, and appease, the Muslim community to keep them from turning into extremists. You guys said that not me. I will go back and find the posts if I gotta Islamic extremists I am sorry to say, blow up shit. So again, and again I ask, what other groups of people are you appeasing for fear that they will go extreme on you and blow up your shit??
We know that your world is black and white, lowing. You don't have to make it so abundantly clear all the time. My opinions are my own, and while I'm sure that you wish you could apply the opinions of others to me through no correlation other than the fact that the people who hold them also disagree with you, you're out of luck.

As I said before, and I'll say it again for the last time, which I'm sure won't stop you from trying to force through the same failed argument, which seems to be the only thing you have; We throw extremists in jail. We create dialogue with people who feel that society doesn't fully accomodate them. Be it disabled people, the elderly, muslims, christians, jews, homosexuals, or whatever other physically or socially disadvantaged group.

It's funny how you're trying to tell me that I'm out of arguments, while I keep answering the same questions of yours with the same answers, over and over, every time you try to present some new excuse for asking them. They aren't going to change, lowing. You aren't going to find anything that can make your failed argument stand. One would think that if you had such a good argument, you wouldn't need to ask the same question after having it answered fully.

Last edited by mikkel (2007-08-04 10:41:15)

2007-08-04 10:42:54
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6652|USA

Chaos_nation wrote:

lowing wrote:

taken from
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detay … ;bolum=102
Sorry but after reading that post, I fail to see where it says that anyone wants to appease terrorists.

It does have more to do with looking at accepting others who are different from ourselves though, finding out what makes them tick and seeing if we can live together. There's nothing wrong with that, its been happening globally for years with more success in some areas of the world than others admittedly, but all the same it is commonplace.

The biggest issue here is due to the acts of a small minority of people who say that they are acting in the name of a larger group, bigots target the larger group for retaliation. That's dumb which ever way you want to look at it.

Here is a scenario for you.

If I could get enough publicity by targeting Western bases around the world and claim to be a UK Christian extremist trying to rid the world of the Western beast, would the world declare war on all UK Christians?

I think not, it is merely the fact that Islam is used by the terrorists as their "Signature" that turns the rest of the world against those who follow Islam. It a shame really, most of the Muslims I know are really decent people who are accepting of others' ways of life and just want the opportunity to get on with their lives without the fear of being targeted for a beating because Osama drops a plane into a building in their name or closer to home organises the bombing of tube trains.
Sorry I missed your post:

But I answer it like this:

If such a small group of terrorists have high-jacked such a peace loving and tolerant religion, then the vast majority of those peace loving and tolerant followers of that religion should have no problem snuffing out the high-jackers. Hell Iwould settle for groups like CAIR to come out openly against them ( oh, and back it by not financially supporting it)
2007-08-04 10:56:56
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6652|USA

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

YOur ramblings have missed itsa mark:

you will no doubt dismiss every quote I or anyone else will post to support our opinions. I then said you will quote a single man ( in this case I used Bush) to prove a point. I used Bush as an example nothing more, so put away your cry rag and your pitty, because it isn't needed.
I think you need to be somewhat more eloquent, instead of typing one thing and meaning a completely different thing. If you kept doing that, one might think that you were actually backpedaling.

No doubt I will dismiss anything anyone posts, because.. uh.. what exactly is it that leads you to believe that? I'd respond in depth to this if it was based even on a failed assumption, but it being pulled out of absolutely nowhere with no substantiating evidence, I really do not know where to begin.

lowing wrote:

It is very hard to quote anything except a single man. SO the now the question will then be, how many quotes from how many different people are needed before you will not dismiss the argument before you?
If it's very hard for you to quote anything except the subjective opinions of a single muslim when discussing muslims in general, I don't think you're quite ready to debate this topic yet. If all you can think of to substantiate that opinion as commonly held amongst muslims is posting more subjective opinions from muslim individials, I don't think you really know how to argue your case. I could find 20 people in the US who believe that they could eat the moon, was it close enough, and post their testimonies. That does not mean that all Americans believe that they could eat the moon.

Until you can provide anything that substantiates the alleged ubiquity of this sentiment, you shouldn't be surprised that people dismiss what you say as being irrelevant and insubstantial, because anything less than that is both.


We aren't trying to appease any group that threatens to "blow out shit up". We jail those people. Who we -are- trying to work things out with are regular, moderate muslims who face racial and religious discrimination and social stigma. The world isn't black and white. People like you who think that are dangerously ignorant.
Nice debate tactic, spend a page NOT debating anything, just dismiss your opponant as not worth debating or too ignorant for you to be bothered with. I will try that next time I can not come up with an argument. I will also bombard them with condensending insult after insult.
Heh, let's see it from the other side, the one that you seem so incapable of realising exists. Could it possibly be that dismissing your irrelevant arguments has something to do with the fact that they're, well, irrelevant, and that in this entire page, you haven't actually presented anything substantial to support your case?

Your general MO seems to be trying a shaky argument full of flaws, and when it fails, you turn the problem of your inadequate argument into the problem of your opposition rightfully dismissing it, and you do it through broad and inapplicable generalisations and claims that are all pulled out of nowhere, but are somehow supposed to discredit the opinions of the people you argue against.

I don't think anyone reading this thread is blind to the fact that you have absolutely no argument going, and you're resorting to these circular, ad hominem logical fallacies to try to make you feel better about yourself by hoping to drag the debate just off topic enough for you to feel no need to concede anything. Have fun with that.


lowing wrote:

It has been argued by people form "your side" that you are attempting to listen to, and appease, the Muslim community to keep them from turning into extremists. You guys said that not me. I will go back and find the posts if I gotta Islamic extremists I am sorry to say, blow up shit. So again, and again I ask, what other groups of people are you appeasing for fear that they will go extreme on you and blow up your shit??
We know that your world is black and white, lowing. You don't have to make it so abundantly clear all the time. My opinions are my own, and while I'm sure that you wish you could apply the opinions of others to me through no correlation other than the fact that the people who hold them also disagree with you, you're out of luck.

As I said before, and I'll say it again for the last time, which I'm sure won't stop you from trying to force through the same failed argument, which seems to be the only thing you have; We throw extremists in jail. We create dialogue with people who feel that society doesn't fully accomodate them. Be it disabled people, the elderly, muslims, christians, jews, homosexuals, or whatever other physically or socially disadvantaged group.

It's funny how you're trying to tell me that I'm out of arguments, while I keep answering the same questions of yours with the same answers, over and over, every time you try to present some new excuse for asking them. They aren't going to change, lowing. You aren't going to find anything that can make your failed argument stand. One would think that if you had such a good argument, you wouldn't need to ask the same question after having it answered fully.
Same post as before so same response. You haven't addressed shit. The OP is a valid debate topic. Your lack of anything except condensending  insults is not.

Please tell when your govt. opened up "dialog" with Christians in order to appease them so they did not turn extreme on you, or the elderly, or the handicapped, or the jews, or the homosexuals, or the disabled. I am not saying these groups have not been heard, but not for fear of terrorism.
YOU guys said to solve the extremism/terrorism problems of the world you need to solve the issues that cause them. Ok my word for that is appeasement. WHat is yours?


What other groups in the world do we have to appease to keep them from going extreme?
2007-08-04 11:42:53
mikkel
Member
+383|6602

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:


Nice debate tactic, spend a page NOT debating anything, just dismiss your opponant as not worth debating or too ignorant for you to be bothered with. I will try that next time I can not come up with an argument. I will also bombard them with condensending insult after insult.
Heh, let's see it from the other side, the one that you seem so incapable of realising exists. Could it possibly be that dismissing your irrelevant arguments has something to do with the fact that they're, well, irrelevant, and that in this entire page, you haven't actually presented anything substantial to support your case?

Your general MO seems to be trying a shaky argument full of flaws, and when it fails, you turn the problem of your inadequate argument into the problem of your opposition rightfully dismissing it, and you do it through broad and inapplicable generalisations and claims that are all pulled out of nowhere, but are somehow supposed to discredit the opinions of the people you argue against.

I don't think anyone reading this thread is blind to the fact that you have absolutely no argument going, and you're resorting to these circular, ad hominem logical fallacies to try to make you feel better about yourself by hoping to drag the debate just off topic enough for you to feel no need to concede anything. Have fun with that.


lowing wrote:

It has been argued by people form "your side" that you are attempting to listen to, and appease, the Muslim community to keep them from turning into extremists. You guys said that not me. I will go back and find the posts if I gotta Islamic extremists I am sorry to say, blow up shit. So again, and again I ask, what other groups of people are you appeasing for fear that they will go extreme on you and blow up your shit??
We know that your world is black and white, lowing. You don't have to make it so abundantly clear all the time. My opinions are my own, and while I'm sure that you wish you could apply the opinions of others to me through no correlation other than the fact that the people who hold them also disagree with you, you're out of luck.

As I said before, and I'll say it again for the last time, which I'm sure won't stop you from trying to force through the same failed argument, which seems to be the only thing you have; We throw extremists in jail. We create dialogue with people who feel that society doesn't fully accomodate them. Be it disabled people, the elderly, muslims, christians, jews, homosexuals, or whatever other physically or socially disadvantaged group.

It's funny how you're trying to tell me that I'm out of arguments, while I keep answering the same questions of yours with the same answers, over and over, every time you try to present some new excuse for asking them. They aren't going to change, lowing. You aren't going to find anything that can make your failed argument stand. One would think that if you had such a good argument, you wouldn't need to ask the same question after having it answered fully.
Same post as before so same response. You haven't addressed shit. The OP is a valid debate topic. Your lack of anything except condensending  insults is not.
Heh, what exactly is it that I have not addressed? I answered your question. As I have several times before. That you seem stuck on it and unable to move on is due to your failed argument, not a lack of answers on my part.

lowing wrote:

Please tell when your govt. opened up "dialog" with Christians in order to appease them so they did not turn extreme on you, or the elderly, or the handicapped, or the jews, or the homosexuals, or the disabled. I am not saying these groups have not been heard, but not for fear of terrorism.
Like I have said again and again (and now again), we are not appeasing anyone to prevent extremism. Is it really that hard to understand? You're adding nothing to the discussion by asking this pointless question over and over after having gotten your answer.


lowing wrote:

YOU guys said to solve the extremism/terrorism problems of the world you need to solve the issues that cause them. Ok my word for that is appeasement. WHat is yours?
Dialogue and mutual respect. Obviously. I'm not surprised though that you are unable to see beyond an eye for an eye. It seems you're stuck in a black and white box that you can't think outside of. We don't, and have never compromised with our ideals to appease any foreign minority. The US seems to be compromising its ideals on a daily basis for just that.

Get in the game, lowing. You're asking the same questions over and over, and you're unable to understand the answer.
2007-08-04 15:32:51
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6652|USA

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

Nice debate tactic, spend a page NOT debating anything, just dismiss your opponent as not worth debating or too ignorant for you to be bothered with. I will try that next time I can not come up with an argument. I will also bombard them with condescending insult after insult.
Heh, let's see it from the other side, the one that you seem so incapable of realising exists. Could it possibly be that dismissing your irrelevant arguments has something to do with the fact that they're, well, irrelevant, and that in this entire page, you haven't actually presented anything substantial to support your case?

Your general MO seems to be trying a shaky argument full of flaws, and when it fails, you turn the problem of your inadequate argument into the problem of your opposition rightfully dismissing it, and you do it through broad and inapplicable generalisations and claims that are all pulled out of nowhere, but are somehow supposed to discredit the opinions of the people you argue against.

I don't think anyone reading this thread is blind to the fact that you have absolutely no argument going, and you're resorting to these circular, ad homonym logical fallacies to try to make you feel better about yourself by hoping to drag the debate just off topic enough for you to feel no need to concede anything. Have fun with that.



We know that your world is black and white, lowing. You don't have to make it so abundantly clear all the time. My opinions are my own, and while I'm sure that you wish you could apply the opinions of others to me through no correlation other than the fact that the people who hold them also disagree with you, you're out of luck.

As I said before, and I'll say it again for the last time, which I'm sure won't stop you from trying to force through the same failed argument, which seems to be the only thing you have; We throw extremists in jail. We create dialogue with people who feel that society doesn't fully accommodate them. Be it disabled people, the elderly, Muslims, Christians, Jews, homosexuals, or whatever other physically or socially disadvantaged group.

It's funny how you're trying to tell me that I'm out of arguments, while I keep answering the same questions of yours with the same answers, over and over, every time you try to present some new excuse for asking them. They aren't going to change, lowing. You aren't going to find anything that can make your failed argument stand. One would think that if you had such a good argument, you wouldn't need to ask the same question after having it answered fully.
Same post as before so same response. You haven't addressed shit. The OP is a valid debate topic. Your lack of anything except condescending  insults is not.
Heh, what exactly is it that I have not addressed? I answered your question. As I have several times before. That you seem stuck on it and unable to move on is due to your failed argument, not a lack of answers on my part.

lowing wrote:

Please tell when your govt. opened up "dialog" with Christians in order to appease them so they did not turn extreme on you, or the elderly, or the handicapped, or the Jews, or the homosexuals, or the disabled. I am not saying these groups have not been heard, but not for fear of terrorism.
Like I have said again and again (and now again), we are not appeasing anyone to prevent extremism. Is it really that hard to understand? You're adding nothing to the discussion by asking this pointless question over and over after having gotten your answer.


lowing wrote:

YOU guys said to solve the extremism/terrorism problems of the world you need to solve the issues that cause them. Ok my word for that is appeasement. What is yours?
Dialogue and mutual respect. Obviously. I'm not surprised though that you are unable to see beyond an eye for an eye. It seems you're stuck in a black and white box that you can't think outside of. We don't, and have never compromised with our ideals to appease any foreign minority. The US seems to be compromising its ideals on a daily basis for just that.

Get in the game, lowing. You're asking the same questions over and over, and you're unable to understand the answer.
With you , the whole issue is WHY are you appeasing the Muslims. The article says it is because of "Islamaphobia". By your own admittance, this is defined as afraid of Muslims. Well, why would anyone be afraid of Muslims, if it is not for their history of intolerance,and abuse and now radical behavior that leads to terrorism by certain groups.

You are trying to feed me a shit sandwich that says, you are simply trying find out what your citizens problems are so you can diversify, and shit. THAT is bullshit and you know it. You are trying to find out what their problem is and fix it so they do not turn into extremists on you, and you know it. SO blow it up someone else's ass your claim that you are doing this to further include the Muslims, or diversify or accommodate.

Like I said even those in this thread on your side of the issue has said as much.

I am sorry if being and appeaser is distasteful to you. I mean it must be you refuse to admit it. but the article clearly shows you are trying to deal with Islamaphobia, NOT by dealing with the people that have the phobia, but by dealing with Muslims who do not. 


If I have arachnophobia, is the problem mine, or the spiders? SO why is so much attention over Islamaphobia going to Islam instead of the person with the fear?  How EXACTLY is accommodating, listening, alleviating grief from Muslims, going to cure someone's Islamaphobia? DO tell
2007-08-04 17:23:40
Chaos_nation
Anarchy in the UK
+6|6185|Wolverhampton
Lowing, you keep asking about what other groups are being appeased by liberals the same way that the European Liberals are looking at dealing with Muslims.

In the UK the government have been talking to the IRA (or rather the factions that were grouped together and called the IRA by the press) for decades to try to come to some sort of agreement. As part of that process, the UK government has made concessions and so has the opposition.

Some could argue that the UK government was guilty of appeasing the Irish terrorist organisations (who were over here blowing our shit up incidentally). Some would argue that the UK government saw that there was a problem and tackled it....but who would be right?
2007-08-04 17:59:58
herrr_smity
Member
+156|6629|space command ur anus
national socialism ftw (bad joke)
2007-08-04 20:28:06
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6652|USA

Chaos_nation wrote:

Lowing, you keep asking about what other groups are being appeased by liberals the same way that the European Liberals are looking at dealing with Muslims.

In the UK the government have been talking to the IRA (or rather the factions that were grouped together and called the IRA by the press) for decades to try to come to some sort of agreement. As part of that process, the UK government has made concessions and so has the opposition.

Some could argue that the UK government was guilty of appeasing the Irish terrorist organisations (who were over here blowing our shit up incidentally). Some would argue that the UK government saw that there was a problem and tackled it....but who would be right?
Good post and great point. Can not disagree with this

It does not however explain WHY, you are appeasing Muslims specifically, however. It is claimed because, you are just trying to make life better for all. I think, and this article reads like, you are doing so to keep them happy so they do not go extremist on you. That is appeasement. 
Your dealings with the IRA may be a little different. They did not want your land or your govt. They wanted you out of theirs.

Islamic extremists WANT you converted to Islam and see England as a Muslim nation, your govt. is bending to them making it easier to accomplish just that. Even if considered a very small baby step toward that goal.

Would you consider that a fair statement?
2007-08-04 21:27:25
jonsimon
Member
+224|6496

lowing wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

lowing wrote:


There are no problems in Dearborn with Muslims because the Muslims OWN it now, what in the world are you talking about??? Dearborn has has already been converted. It is what Miami is to Cubans.
AHAHAHAHAHA! Wow, lowing, wow. MAYBE YOU SHOULD TRY LIVING HERE FOR 18 YEARS. Dearborn has not been 'converted'. This is a genuine demonstration of the basis of your argument. Fiction. Fiction is the basis of your argument. You have no experience or observations of the condition of life here, and yet you will make a broad sweeping generalization. At this point it does not seem unreasonable to assume ALL your assertions are nothing but broad sweeping FICTIONAL generalizations.

Edit: Oh, and the correct answer to my question was money. The muslims that immigrated here were refugees that escaped their countries because they could afford to. They have money, friends, family, and freedoms. Because they are not deprived of these things they are not prone to crime. It is when you have large amounts of culturally linked poor immigrants that you have a community ripe for manipulation by a single extremist.
"Dearborn's population includes 30,000 Arab-Americans, [2] [3] [4], the second largest, and the densest Arab population of any community outside the Middle East. (New York City has nearly 70,000, out of a total population of over 8 million.) Arabs first settled here to work in the automotive industry. In January 2005, a new Arab American National Museum opened as a result of this large concentrated population. The city is also home to the Islamic Center of America, the largest mosque in North America and the Dearborn Mosque, as well as a mosque in the South End that is one of the few places in the US where one can hear the call to prayer over a loudspeaker. Because of the Arab cultural influence on the east side of Dearborn, store signs and billboards written in Arabic are common sights."


Sorry buudy, tell it to someone who has never been there, oh and if you are still there, good luck selling yer house.
Store signs in arabic and a couple mosques makes the city muslim? You don't seem to understand that arabic and muslim are different, either. Oh well, I'll let you roll and play in your ignorance like pigs in mud. You obviously seem to think that having been in east dearborn gives you more insight than living in the city for 18 years.
2007-08-04 21:41:39
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6652|USA

jonsimon wrote:

lowing wrote:

jonsimon wrote:


AHAHAHAHAHA! Wow, lowing, wow. MAYBE YOU SHOULD TRY LIVING HERE FOR 18 YEARS. Dearborn has not been 'converted'. This is a genuine demonstration of the basis of your argument. Fiction. Fiction is the basis of your argument. You have no experience or observations of the condition of life here, and yet you will make a broad sweeping generalization. At this point it does not seem unreasonable to assume ALL your assertions are nothing but broad sweeping FICTIONAL generalizations.

Edit: Oh, and the correct answer to my question was money. The muslims that immigrated here were refugees that escaped their countries because they could afford to. They have money, friends, family, and freedoms. Because they are not deprived of these things they are not prone to crime. It is when you have large amounts of culturally linked poor immigrants that you have a community ripe for manipulation by a single extremist.
"Dearborn's population includes 30,000 Arab-Americans, [2] [3] [4], the second largest, and the densest Arab population of any community outside the Middle East. (New York City has nearly 70,000, out of a total population of over 8 million.) Arabs first settled here to work in the automotive industry. In January 2005, a new Arab American National Museum opened as a result of this large concentrated population. The city is also home to the Islamic Center of America, the largest mosque in North America and the Dearborn Mosque, as well as a mosque in the South End that is one of the few places in the US where one can hear the call to prayer over a loudspeaker. Because of the Arab cultural influence on the east side of Dearborn, store signs and billboards written in Arabic are common sights."


Sorry buudy, tell it to someone who has never been there, oh and if you are still there, good luck selling yer house.
Store signs in arabic and a couple mosques makes the city muslim? You don't seem to understand that arabic and muslim are different, either. Oh well, I'll let you roll and play in your ignorance like pigs in mud. You obviously seem to think that having been in east dearborn gives you more insight than living in the city for 18 years.
No you are right, living there makes you the fuckin' Dearborn expert alright. I was smart enough early on to get the fuck out from around that shithole, apparently you can't sell your house or you would be gone as well. I do know the difference between Muslim and Arabic, I just needed to paint the picture of your beloved town for what it has become. Honestly though, do you think there is a significant difference when it comes to a laid off auto worker who is trying to sell, no wait, give away, their house??

I spent a lot of my childhood in Detroit metro area. I do not miss it one bit
2007-08-04 21:53:56
jonsimon
Member
+224|6496

lowing wrote:

No you are right, living there makes you the fuckin' Dearborn expert alright. I was smart enough early on to get the fuck out from around that shithole, apparently you can't sell your house or you would be gone as well. I do know the difference between Muslim and Arabic, I just needed to paint the picture of your beloved town for what it has become. Honestly though, do you think there is a significant difference when it comes to a laid off auto worker who is trying to sell, no wait, give away, their house??

I spent a lot of my childhood in Detroit metro area. I do not miss it one bit
Why would we want to sell our house? Dearborn is a great community, perfect for raising your son. Though, you are right, we'll probably be moving next year, don't want to be caught on this sinking ship called America. And yes, there is a huge difference between a muslim arab and a christian arab. Primarily the fact that they partake in two different religions. I'm just glad you left Dearborn, I'd hate to have such a violent person in my neighborhood. You're missing out on some great hummous too. Oh, and you're painting an innaccurate picture, there is more to dearborn than just the east side. Besides, what's wrong with a little culture in your town? Sorry lowing, but Dearborn isn't "converted" and muslims don't "own" the city. Dearborn is just a regular suburban city that shares with a strong cultural community.
2007-08-04 21:55:59
Catbox
forgiveness
+505|6717
I wonder how many peoples tunes will change when a big event like 9/11 happens in their country... god forbid... killing them or a family member...  I realize a lot of muslims cant speak out against the nuts in their group due to fear of reprisal...But it seems like they are slowly creeping in and asking for special things... then they go apeshit if someone draws a picture...  I know some Iranians and Iraqis and they are very  cool...  There are just an awful lot of them that are stuck in a different century...   Hopefully the younger muslims will want to live in peace and just enjoy their lives...   peace
Love is the answer
2007-08-04 21:58:11
Catbox
forgiveness
+505|6717
here you go... right in Dearborn...   

http://polipundit.com/wp-comments-popup … 01&c=1
Love is the answer
2007-08-04 22:04:13
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6652|USA

jonsimon wrote:

lowing wrote:

No you are right, living there makes you the fuckin' Dearborn expert alright. I was smart enough early on to get the fuck out from around that shithole, apparently you can't sell your house or you would be gone as well. I do know the difference between Muslim and Arabic, I just needed to paint the picture of your beloved town for what it has become. Honestly though, do you think there is a significant difference when it comes to a laid off auto worker who is trying to sell, no wait, give away, their house??

I spent a lot of my childhood in Detroit metro area. I do not miss it one bit
Why would we want to sell our house? Dearborn is a great community, perfect for raising your son. Though, you are right, we'll probably be moving next year, don't want to be caught on this sinking ship called America. And yes, there is a huge difference between a muslim arab and a christian arab. Primarily the fact that they partake in two different religions. I'm just glad you left Dearborn, I'd hate to have such a violent person in my neighborhood. You're missing out on some great hummous too. Oh, and you're painting an innaccurate picture, there is more to dearborn than just the east side. Besides, what's wrong with a little culture in your town? Sorry lowing, but Dearborn isn't "converted" and muslims don't "own" the city. Dearborn is just a regular suburban city that shares with a strong cultural community.
Can not blame anyone for defending their home town. But, violent, why would you call me violent? I have never been arrested, charged or even accuse of anything, let alone anything in a violent nature. Never beat my wife, or my kids. Helped coach my sons ball teams, helped out in my kids classrooms and on field trips etc......Pretty much my family is my life, not some bar or street corner or jail cell. Not sure where ya got me as violent. I guess from the same reasoning that has me pegged as a racist or bigot. When in all actuality, I have never spoken one racist or bigoted word on this forum.

anyway + 1 for your hometown
2007-08-04 22:05:39
jonsimon
Member
+224|6496

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

here you go... right in Dearborn...   

http://polipundit.com/wp-comments-popup … 01&c=1
“You can’t back down, you can’t chicken out, you can’t be afraid, you got to have faith in Allah, and you got to stand up and be a real Muslim,” Detroit native Keith Ellison said to loud applause.

And that makes him a terrorist how? Oh, right, I see, he committed himself to introducing sharia law. Oh wait, no he didn't. He held his hand over a different book when sworn in. So scandalous. He obviously wants to bring freedom and America to its knees.
2007-08-04 22:07:22
jonsimon
Member
+224|6496

lowing wrote:

Can not blame anyone for defending their home town. But, violent, why would you call me violent? I have never been arrested, charged or even accuse of anything, let alone anything in a violent nature. Never beat my wife, or my kids. Helped coach my sons ball teams, helped out in my kids classrooms and on field trips etc......Pretty much my family is my life, not some bar or street corner or jail cell. Not sure where ya got me as violent. I guess from the same reasoning that has me pegged as a racist or bigot. When in all actuality, I have never spoken one racist or bigoted word on this forum.

anyway + 1 for your hometown
Your attitude towards capital punishment and lack of value for others' lives or mercy depicts you poorly.
2007-08-04 22:22:11
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6652|USA

jonsimon wrote:

lowing wrote:

Can not blame anyone for defending their home town. But, violent, why would you call me violent? I have never been arrested, charged or even accuse of anything, let alone anything in a violent nature. Never beat my wife, or my kids. Helped coach my sons ball teams, helped out in my kids classrooms and on field trips etc......Pretty much my family is my life, not some bar or street corner or jail cell. Not sure where ya got me as violent. I guess from the same reasoning that has me pegged as a racist or bigot. When in all actuality, I have never spoken one racist or bigoted word on this forum.

anyway + 1 for your hometown
Your attitude towards capital punishment and lack of value for others' lives or mercy depicts you poorly.
My attitude toward capital punishment is the way it is, precisely because I value life. I believe in punishment not rehabilitation. Mercy? That word makes me feel like a tyrant who is begged for it constantly. Mercy is not mine to give or to withhold. I believe in helping those that are not able to help themselves, and I loathe those that choose not to be bothered with helping themselves and expect everyone to do it for them. I defy you to show me one sentence in this forum that says anything else. If I am anything on this forum I am consistant in my beliefs, and those beliefs hold personal responsibility for our own actions at the core, for everyone, equally. Sorry if you feel otherwise about me.
2007-08-04 22:27:30
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|6763

lowing wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

lowing wrote:

No you are right, living there makes you the fuckin' Dearborn expert alright. I was smart enough early on to get the fuck out from around that shithole, apparently you can't sell your house or you would be gone as well. I do know the difference between Muslim and Arabic, I just needed to paint the picture of your beloved town for what it has become. Honestly though, do you think there is a significant difference when it comes to a laid off auto worker who is trying to sell, no wait, give away, their house??

I spent a lot of my childhood in Detroit metro area. I do not miss it one bit
Why would we want to sell our house? Dearborn is a great community, perfect for raising your son. Though, you are right, we'll probably be moving next year, don't want to be caught on this sinking ship called America. And yes, there is a huge difference between a muslim arab and a christian arab. Primarily the fact that they partake in two different religions. I'm just glad you left Dearborn, I'd hate to have such a violent person in my neighborhood. You're missing out on some great hummous too. Oh, and you're painting an innaccurate picture, there is more to dearborn than just the east side. Besides, what's wrong with a little culture in your town? Sorry lowing, but Dearborn isn't "converted" and muslims don't "own" the city. Dearborn is just a regular suburban city that shares with a strong cultural community.
Can not blame anyone for defending their home town. But, violent, why would you call me violent? I have never been arrested, charged or even accuse of anything, let alone anything in a violent nature. Never beat my wife, or my kids. Helped coach my sons ball teams, helped out in my kids classrooms and on field trips etc......Pretty much my family is my life, not some bar or street corner or jail cell. Not sure where ya got me as violent. I guess from the same reasoning that has me pegged as a racist or bigot. When in all actuality, I have never spoken one racist or bigoted word on this forum.

anyway + 1 for your hometown
Ya..Dearborn is great.

http://palestinename.com/trueislam.htm

"Last Friday, Muslims in Dearborn, Michigan, held an anti-American, anti-Israel demonstration. Protesters carried a large model of Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque and waved signs bearing slogans such as “US Hands Off Muslim Land.”



Well then GTFO, go back to your great countries.
2007-08-04 22:35:41
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6652|USA

usmarine2005 wrote:

lowing wrote:

jonsimon wrote:


Why would we want to sell our house? Dearborn is a great community, perfect for raising your son. Though, you are right, we'll probably be moving next year, don't want to be caught on this sinking ship called America. And yes, there is a huge difference between a muslim arab and a christian arab. Primarily the fact that they partake in two different religions. I'm just glad you left Dearborn, I'd hate to have such a violent person in my neighborhood. You're missing out on some great hummous too. Oh, and you're painting an innaccurate picture, there is more to dearborn than just the east side. Besides, what's wrong with a little culture in your town? Sorry lowing, but Dearborn isn't "converted" and muslims don't "own" the city. Dearborn is just a regular suburban city that shares with a strong cultural community.
Can not blame anyone for defending their home town. But, violent, why would you call me violent? I have never been arrested, charged or even accuse of anything, let alone anything in a violent nature. Never beat my wife, or my kids. Helped coach my sons ball teams, helped out in my kids classrooms and on field trips etc......Pretty much my family is my life, not some bar or street corner or jail cell. Not sure where ya got me as violent. I guess from the same reasoning that has me pegged as a racist or bigot. When in all actuality, I have never spoken one racist or bigoted word on this forum.

anyway + 1 for your hometown
Ya..Dearborn is great.

http://palestinename.com/trueislam.htm

"Last Friday, Muslims in Dearborn, Michigan, held an anti-American, anti-Israel demonstration. Protesters carried a large model of Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque and waved signs bearing slogans such as “US Hands Off Muslim Land.”



Well then GTFO, go back to your great countries.
sighhhhhhhhhh, you are such an Islamaphobe, who obviously has a desperate need to underatand. Your bigotry will be your downfall.
2007-08-05 01:15:06
mikkel
Member
+383|6602

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

Same post as before so same response. You haven't addressed shit. The OP is a valid debate topic. Your lack of anything except condescending  insults is not.
Heh, what exactly is it that I have not addressed? I answered your question. As I have several times before. That you seem stuck on it and unable to move on is due to your failed argument, not a lack of answers on my part.

lowing wrote:

Please tell when your govt. opened up "dialog" with Christians in order to appease them so they did not turn extreme on you, or the elderly, or the handicapped, or the Jews, or the homosexuals, or the disabled. I am not saying these groups have not been heard, but not for fear of terrorism.
Like I have said again and again (and now again), we are not appeasing anyone to prevent extremism. Is it really that hard to understand? You're adding nothing to the discussion by asking this pointless question over and over after having gotten your answer.


lowing wrote:

YOU guys said to solve the extremism/terrorism problems of the world you need to solve the issues that cause them. Ok my word for that is appeasement. What is yours?
Dialogue and mutual respect. Obviously. I'm not surprised though that you are unable to see beyond an eye for an eye. It seems you're stuck in a black and white box that you can't think outside of. We don't, and have never compromised with our ideals to appease any foreign minority. The US seems to be compromising its ideals on a daily basis for just that.

Get in the game, lowing. You're asking the same questions over and over, and you're unable to understand the answer.
With you , the whole issue is WHY are you appeasing the Muslims. The article says it is because of "Islamaphobia". By your own admittance, this is defined as afraid of Muslims. Well, why would anyone be afraid of Muslims, if it is not for their history of intolerance,and abuse and now radical behavior that leads to terrorism by certain groups.
Heh, it's amusing that it hasn't hit you sooner. Some weaker-minded people are afraid of muslims because of people like you spewing this crap and fostering antipathy. Homophobia is widespread. Why should anyone be afraid of homosexuals, "if it is not for their history of intolerance, abuse and now radical behaviour that leads to terrorism by certain groups"? Oh wait, right, it's because of bigotry and religious types spreading unwarranted antipathy.

lowing wrote:

You are trying to feed me a shit sandwich that says, you are simply trying find out what your citizens problems are so you can diversify, and shit. THAT is bullshit and you know it. You are trying to find out what their problem is and fix it so they do not turn into extremists on you, and you know it. SO blow it up someone else's ass your claim that you are doing this to further include the Muslims, or diversify or accommodate.
Heh, if all you have as a comeback is "bullshit!" to something that you obviously cannot comprehend, then I cannot fathom why you even venture into these debates in the first place.

lowing wrote:

Like I said even those in this thread on your side of the issue has said as much.

I am sorry if being and appeaser is distasteful to you. I mean it must be you refuse to admit it. but the article clearly shows you are trying to deal with Islamaphobia, NOT by dealing with the people that have the phobia, but by dealing with Muslims who do not.
Heh, like I said before (it's amazing how I have to say the same things to you multiple times before you understand them, if ever), my opinions are my own. What others have said, regardless of opinion, is irrelevant to me.

Oh yes, the age old undeniable logic of "if you smelled it, you expelled it". Obviously if I'm trying to tell you that no one is trying to appease extremists, it must mean that we really are, and that we just won't admit it. Honestly, lowing, you're in your thirties.

When dealing with irrational phobia like these, we enter into dialogue with muslims and islamophobes alike. The thing is that like with so many other irrational phobia, the person suffering from it is rarely willing to change their opinion. The kind of bigotry involved is impossible to have a sensible dialogue around, so the only option is to ask the muslims what can be done instead, and this dialogue is very fruitful in this part of the world.


lowing wrote:

If I have arachnophobia, is the problem mine, or the spiders? SO why is so much attention over Islamaphobia going to Islam instead of the person with the fear?  How EXACTLY is accommodating, listening, alleviating grief from Muslims, going to cure someone's Islamaphobia? DO tell
If you suffer from arachnophobia, the problem is yours. If you're unwilling to change, not much will be done, because it's just a spider. What you seem to forget is that these are human beings who have just as much of a right to live in your country as you do. If you have a problem with these people, the problem is still yours, and if there's no way to change it, dialogue is by necessity unidirectional.

If you went and shot a muslim because of your islamophobia, the problem would still be yours, but they wouldn't be driving you to the hospital for treatment.

The point of dialogue is to find a way to settle differences. If one party is unwilling to compromise, the dialogue then becomes one of finding out how to best ignore this bigotry.

Last edited by mikkel (2007-08-05 01:16:10)

2007-08-05 04:02:46
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6652|USA
You are indeed a master at double talk and pointing out the obvious. I however wish for you to stick to the OP

Is there any chance you will address the OP and the obvious appeasement of the Muslim community in order to keep them from going extremist on you? Isn't that what the article is addressing? NOT a person's fears of Islam, if a fear of Islam were your problem you would educate the person who is fearful. That is not what this article is saying is going on. It clearly says they are addressing the Muslim problems. They are doing so because THEY are the Islamaphobes. Not the people you accuse.

Other than your continued avoidance of the OP, you have really great posts. Very condescending and full of redirection.
2007-08-05 08:58:54
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6556

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

"European socialists have devised their brilliant plan to combat "Islamophobia" ... "LISTEN" to the 20 million European Muslims, try to UNDERSTAND their problems, and provide solutions to ALLEVIATE their grievances."

"In other words ... find out just what they want, and then give it to them."  http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html under reading assignments.



taken from
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detay … ;bolum=102




Pretty much what I have been saying all along. Appeasement is the Liberal/Socialist answer. How about that.
lol
Whats even more funny is, you laugh like it isn't true.
Its preposterous and way off the mark. Excuse my punctuation = Czech keyboard.

 

Pages: 1 … 3 4 5

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard