socci

Cameron, MO

#158864 Feb 3, 2013
As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:

United States -- Muslim 0.6%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1.8%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:

Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:

France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections in:

Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:

Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
"Palestine" -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-al-Salaam'-- the Islamic House of Peace. Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrassas are the only schools, and the Koran is the only “Word”, such as in:

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 100%

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.
http://theroadtoemmaus.org/RdLb/33Rlg/Islm/Sl...
socci

Cameron, MO

#158866 Feb 3, 2013

Islam Will Conquer Italy and the Entire West

CAIRO, EGYPT – The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) has released excerpts from a transcript of a televised sermon by Egyptian cleric Salem Abu Al-Futuh. Airing on Al-Nas TV on August 18, Al-Futuh's predicted that Islam would conquer the entire West, starting with Italy and ending with the Americas.
www.worthynews.com/9243-islam-will-conquer-it...

uidiotraceMAKEWORLDPEACE wrote:
As US bombs drop in the middle east the Muslims flee their destroyed unstable homeland for more stable lands in the west, even offered refugee status -- this is the reason for the many wars. The global powers allied with the Muslim Brotherhood are moving Islam into the Christian nations: Europe, US, Canada, Aus, and Russia, too, as early as the USSR-Afghan War 1979-89.
Number of US Mosques Double since 2001
www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2012/March/Number-of-U...
Sharia Law taking over Michigan town
Muslim population is growing in the United States. Muslim population in 2012 is estimated to be 2.1 billion worldwide. It is expected to double in 20 years. Mosques are going up everywhere. Their religious belief system is also their law, i.e. Sharia law.

Sharia Law 101
www.youtube.com/watch...
Radical Islam
www.youtube.com/watch...
Secret Plot To Bring 100 Million Muslims to the US
Obama is scheming to bring tens of millions of Muslims—perhaps up to 100 million—from the Middle East into the United States in order to turn this country into an Islamic nation by the end of his second term.
Phase One: Obama foments unrest in "each Middle East country" so that these regimes are toppled and replaced by "fanatic" Sunni Muslims, who go on to "overthrow the competing Shiite regime in Iran without involving American troops."
Phase Two: A massive exodus of Muslims heads toward Europe, Canada, and the Unites States, turning all of these Western nations into Muslim countries.
www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/obamas-s...
www.youtube.com/watch...
You think you own the country your taxes built where you own property and have families. However, your gov't believes they own the country and can replace the citizenry or segments as needed.
Roman Catholic Knight of Columbus president, "John F. Kennedy initially proposed an overhaul of American immigration policy that later was to become the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, sponsored by Kennedy's brother Senator Edward Kennedy. It dramatically shifted the source of immigration from Northern and Western European countries towards immigration from Latin America and Asia [Islamic]."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy#...
• The Real Latin Invasion
www.youtube.com/watch...
Washington allied with Muslim Brotherhood
www.redmoonrising.com/Ikhwan/MB.htm
www.terrorism-illuminati.com/content/muslim-b...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#158867 Feb 3, 2013
Islam is boring.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#158869 Feb 3, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>What branch of the service were you in, Lyndi?
I ask because apparently YOU think it's of some importance. Most veterans of the service I know, at least the post WWII vets, would tell you it's a question without any merit whatsoever.
Note I didn't ask what kind of reflective credit you may try and claim from 'members of your immediate family', because that's a myth.
Now, if you need a resume I spent ten years in the Navy, my father is a WWII vet, one of two grandfathers was WWI era, and the family tree on one side goes back to the French and Indian Wars.
I have no issue with your crediantials to get on the bitch wagon about America and half it's population. You've earned it. Your pedigree gives you that privilege. I take issue with relative newbies who haven't lifted a finger to form this nation, have no servicemen or women in their history who helped create, protect and defend this nation yet somehow think it's a good idea to become a citzen and slam half the country because they've lived here a short while.

My issue is with Catcher and those like him who think America is beaches, friendly people and nice weather and how thrilled he is that he has a platform to vocalize how he can't stand the party who crafted the emancipation proclamation. Like alot of other libs he has it a$$ backwards. Democrats keep the poor, poor and the downtrodden, downtrodden and Obama is enlarging that group in leaps and bounds. Congratulations Mr. President!


Maybe you like the new guy on the block coming into your home slamming half your family, telling you the best way to rear your family and calling you an oppressor. I don't. I think it's audacious and shows bad manners.

Btw, Willy you have a need to try and take control of comments posed here particularly those aimed at liberals. You may want to look into that. Catcher is a big boy. He's an attorney. He probably doesn't need you to intercept my comments and rush in with that little rubber bayonet of yours.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#158870 Feb 3, 2013
Pernrider wrote:
<quoted text>
Willie, it does not make my feel better that you are as judgmental and intolerant as anyone else. I already know that. We all are judgmental and intolerant. It comes with being human. I just think it's sad when people are convinced they are not because they are not being honest with themselves. I am not bothered by the label intolerant that is your cross to bear.
You're playing semantics. Of course, "We all are judgmental and intolerant." There's a major difference between being judgmental and intolerant of abhorrent/antisocial behavior and bigotry, and being abhorrent, antisocial, and bigoted because of intolerance and judgmentalism.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#158871 Feb 3, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no issue with your crediantials to get on the bitch wagon about America and half it's population. You've earned it. Your pedigree gives you that privilege. I take issue with relative newbies who haven't lifted a finger to form this nation, have no servicemen or women in their history who helped create, protect and defend this nation yet somehow think it's a good idea to become a citzen and slam half the country because they've lived here a short while.
My issue is with Catcher and those like him who think America is beaches, friendly people and nice weather and how thrilled he is that he has a platform to vocalize how he can't stand the party who crafted the emancipation proclamation. Like alot of other libs he has it a$$ backwards. Democrats keep the poor, poor and the downtrodden, downtrodden and Obama is enlarging that group in leaps and bounds. Congratulations Mr. President!
Maybe you like the new guy on the block coming into your home slamming half your family, telling you the best way to rear your family and calling you an oppressor. I don't. I think it's audacious and shows bad manners.
Btw, Willy you have a need to try and take control of comments posed here particularly those aimed at liberals. You may want to look into that. Catcher is a big boy. He's an attorney. He probably doesn't need you to intercept my comments and rush in with that little rubber bayonet of yours.
The length you'll go to discredit Catcher's right to his opinions (or to express his opinions) as a method of avoiding anything of substance tells me that we both know he wouldn't need me to 'intercept' your comments, even if I were inclined to try.

I'm sorry you don't like having the basis of your so called questions challenged, Lyndi, but you know the drill ... public message board, yada yada yada.

What you were engaged in is yet another ad hominem. Oh, you dressed it up real pretty, with military service and country-as-family and even dragged out the Emancipation Proclamation for crying out loud, but all that's just filler.

I don't think it's bad manners or audacious for someone to disagree with me about politics. I don't care whether they've just left their naturalization ceremony or they can trace their roots back to the Mayflower. I'd like to think I can handle their ARGUMENTS rather than inventing some phony reason to discredit their right to offer an opinion.

The simple fact of the matter is, Lyndi, those credentials you're talking about are an illusion - a buncha crap.

Catcher may be too polite to tell you that, but I'm not.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#158872 Feb 3, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no issue with your crediantials to get on the bitch wagon about America and half it's population. You've earned it. Your pedigree gives you that privilege. I take issue with relative newbies who haven't lifted a finger to form this nation, have no servicemen or women in their history who helped create, protect and defend this nation yet somehow think it's a good idea to become a citzen and slam half the country because they've lived here a short while.
My issue is with Catcher and those like him who think America is beaches, friendly people and nice weather and how thrilled he is that he has a platform to vocalize how he can't stand the party who crafted the emancipation proclamation. Like alot of other libs he has it a$$ backwards. Democrats keep the poor, poor and the downtrodden, downtrodden and Obama is enlarging that group in leaps and bounds. Congratulations Mr. President!
Maybe you like the new guy on the block coming into your home slamming half your family, telling you the best way to rear your family and calling you an oppressor. I don't. I think it's audacious and shows bad manners.
Btw, Willy you have a need to try and take control of comments posed here particularly those aimed at liberals. You may want to look into that. Catcher is a big boy. He's an attorney. He probably doesn't need you to intercept my comments and rush in with that little rubber bayonet of yours.
It's just interesting to watch your ongoing propensity for going for the ad personum attack rather than engage in substance, It was on full display in this interview session. I will say Catcher is rather naive to not see you were just gathering information for your arsenal. Shoulda said Nunya.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#158873 Feb 3, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no issue with your crediantials to get on the bitch wagon about America and half it's population. You've earned it. Your pedigree gives you that privilege. I take issue with relative newbies who haven't lifted a finger to form this nation, have no servicemen or women in their history who helped create, protect and defend this nation yet somehow think it's a good idea to become a citzen and slam half the country because they've lived here a short while.
My issue is with Catcher and those like him who think America is beaches, friendly people and nice weather and how thrilled he is that he has a platform to vocalize how he can't stand the party who crafted the emancipation proclamation. Like alot of other libs he has it a$$ backwards. Democrats keep the poor, poor and the downtrodden, downtrodden and Obama is enlarging that group in leaps and bounds. Congratulations Mr. President!
Maybe you like the new guy on the block coming into your home slamming half your family, telling you the best way to rear your family and calling you an oppressor. I don't. I think it's audacious and shows bad manners.
Btw, Willy you have a need to try and take control of comments posed here particularly those aimed at liberals. You may want to look into that. Catcher is a big boy. He's an attorney. He probably doesn't need you to intercept my comments and rush in with that little rubber bayonet of yours.
Lyndi,

Your attack-dog attempts to disparage my character with repeated ad hominem posts have become very tiresome. Also tiresome is your faux patriotism, as you wrap yourself around the flag in an attempt to diminish the value of my views. Nor does pedigree mean anything to me, we are each responsible for how we live our lives. I'm happy do discuss issues with you, or anybody else, but I feel no need to defend myself from your sarcastic, personal jabs. Sometimes they are cute, but for the most part they are misanthropic and nasty, and not worthy of a response. So rant away if it makes you feel good, but I'm not going to dignify anything that is personally disrespectful.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#158874 Feb 3, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>It's just interesting to watch your ongoing propensity for going for the ad personum attack rather than engage in substance, It was on full display in this interview session. I will say Catcher is rather naive to not see you were just gathering information for your arsenal. Shoulda said Nunya.
I could see what Lyndl was doing; I'm familiar with her "tactics." But although I did initially hesitate to subject myself to her interrogation, in the end I decided to indulge her. Her questions, I was willing to answer. Her follow-up attacks are unworthy of a response.

I understand that Lyndi is unhappy and upset. The political and societal winds are blowing the wrong way for her. But she needs to find a better way to deal with that, than to go after people personally because they disagree with her views.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#158875 Feb 3, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>The length you'll go to discredit Catcher's right to his opinions (or to express his opinions) as a method of avoiding anything of substance tells me that we both know he wouldn't need me to 'intercept' your comments, even if I were inclined to try.
I'm sorry you don't like having the basis of your so called questions challenged, Lyndi, but you know the drill ... public message board, yada yada yada.
What you were engaged in is yet another ad hominem. Oh, you dressed it up real pretty, with military service and country-as-family and even dragged out the Emancipation Proclamation for crying out loud, but all that's just filler.
I don't think it's bad manners or audacious for someone to disagree with me about politics. I don't care whether they've just left their naturalization ceremony or they can trace their roots back to the Mayflower. I'd like to think I can handle their ARGUMENTS rather than inventing some phony reason to discredit their right to offer an opinion.
The simple fact of the matter is, Lyndi, those credentials you're talking about are an illusion - a buncha crap.
Catcher may be too polite to tell you that, but I'm not.
Oh silly, Willie. You're trying to sell me an extension of the same thing ole ding dong in chief tried to sell half the country which was:
"THEY DIDN'T BUILD THAT!" And it turns out half the country believed the guy!

You dope. That was just a load of feel-good hooey to get the non-achievers to the polls and give the libs some pretend ammo!
We most certainly DID build THIS!

(laughing..........

“On a sailing ship to nowhere”

Since: Jun 07

Colorado

#158876 Feb 3, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>You're playing semantics. Of course, "We all are judgmental and intolerant." There's a major difference between being judgmental and intolerant of abhorrent/antisocial behavior and bigotry, and being abhorrent, antisocial, and bigoted because of intolerance and judgmentalism.
When someone presents their view with clarity, does not bash another's religion but simply sets forth the view that he sees America as based on certain values that he sees as being undermined by certain disregard, should not bring about the vehemence that was aimed at Prager. His views were not anti social nor abhorrent. They are a legitimate opinion. Does Willie have a right to his opinion, yes absolutely, is it rational. I don't think so. He refuses to meet the argument on its grounds and rushes in to name calling. It's knee jerk at its basest level.
The same for the so called lawyer. I would think that someone who makes his living in a courtroom using words and facts as his tools of the trade would have done a better job than just name calling.
Give a reasoned argument or look like one who is afraid of those who think differently. What do you call those people? The word escapes me.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#158877 Feb 3, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand that Lyndi is unhappy and upset. The political and societal winds are blowing the wrong way for her. But she needs to find a better way to deal with that, than to go after people personally because they disagree with her views.
Oh well in that case, how nice it would've been for you to be hangin' around in here when GW Bush was being ripped apart pretty much daily, by liberal "attack dogs" and posters abroad, irate with his foreign policy.

Or maybe you could've helped dispell concusions that Bush was a mental midget because of his many public misspeaks.

We could've used your sensible detente over the years to help calm the fears of those lashing out and encouraging radical behavior such as the maniac throwing his shoes at Bush's head.

And lets not forget your potential roll in reversing the call by many in the US and around the world to have BushCo tried and executed for war crimes. Ay alas & alack it was not to be.

“On a sailing ship to nowhere”

Since: Jun 07

Colorado

#158878 Feb 3, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>There may well be an absolute philosophical truth out there, but in application it's all subjective. I can't dictate to you what it is, how it manifests, and how best to actualize it, and make you accept it just on my say-so, nor can you me, much less someone of a completely different heritage and cultural background. Documents and pronouncements both secular and spiritual in nature have been produced over the millennium each alleging to be inspired, yet until the GREAT IS chooses to write it indelibly in each person's heart at inception, they will never be accepted universally from one fallible human to another. Even among those of ostensibly like-minded groups, disagreement about the simplest phrases is more the norm than the exception.
Thus we're left to impose each our own conception by force, or kill each other, or work it out together for the greatest good at the given time. I'm not sure there's an example in history otherwise. Likewise I've yet to see an absolute truth, dictating right vs wrong, that isn't subject to disclaimers, claims of special "discernment", and interpretation, and applied subjectively according to persons, time, and locale.
I think that >>all being equal<<, mankind is essentially good but fundamentally selfish, which really isn't a knock, since self-interest is a survival instinct. It's the inequities we incorporate into our various social structures that lead to the inhumanity you speak of.
That's what I think, subjectively speaking......;) But then you've heard it before, and I yours, because we've tread this very ground more than once. It's been fun, mostly.
Where I was trying to go with Willie and with Catcher regarding the questions of worldview and absolute or relative truth.

My belief:
When you have various ethnic groups and cultures rubbing elbows together in one country under one government you have got to have something that unifies them. The whole E Pluribus Unum thing. If everyone is allowed to bring their own culture to the foreground their own religion on equal terms with those that developed the system of governance that we enjoy, then you have serious rifts in that fabric. The intent is not to say Christianity or Judaism is superior to what others are bringing to the national table. The intent is to unify a diverse people. And yes, to unify a diverse people means that they/we must put our own imported culture and religion to the lesser of what is already in place.
I am not going to become a citizen of become a citizen of a country that I harshly disagreed with religiously. I expect that if I moved to another country, say Rome, I would not demand they recognize my culture or my faith on equal footing as the Italian Catholic culture that is already in place.
I don't think that all the Founders were necessarily religious men or Christian but I think the principle was to unify under as common an area of agreement as possible without going into divisive issues. That is why there are obvious general references to the Creator deity without naming Jesus Christ. There is no establishing a religion but several biblical references. It was meant as common ground to unify diversity. Jews were here, Christians were here, secularists were here, and something was needed to unify.
Do I totally agree with the viewpoints of all the Founders or the founding documents. In the main, yes. Do I agree with all specifics. No.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#158879 Feb 3, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh silly, Willie. You're trying to sell me an extension of the same thing ole ding dong in chief tried to sell half the country which was:
"THEY DIDN'T BUILD THAT!" And it turns out half the country believed the guy!
You dope. That was just a load of feel-good hooey to get the non-achievers to the polls and give the libs some pretend ammo!
We most certainly DID build THIS!
(laughing..........
Nice use of a talking point - it's just clever enough to make the willing believe it's in any way a response to anything I said.

“On a sailing ship to nowhere”

Since: Jun 07

Colorado

#158880 Feb 3, 2013
Should have proofread more carefully. Rome is not a country. I should have said Italy.
lisw

Sardinia, OH

#158881 Feb 3, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh well in that case, how nice it would've been for you to be hangin' around in here when GW Bush was being ripped apart pretty much daily, by liberal "attack dogs" and posters abroad, irate with his foreign policy.
Or maybe you could've helped dispell concusions that Bush was a mental midget because of his many public misspeaks.
We could've used your sensible detente over the years to help calm the fears of those lashing out and encouraging radical behavior such as the maniac throwing his shoes at Bush's head.
And lets not forget your potential roll in reversing the call by many in the US and around the world to have BushCo tried and executed for war crimes. Ay alas & alack it was not to be.
yep, role reversal is a very therapeutic tool.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#158882 Feb 3, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I could see what Lyndl was doing; I'm familiar with her "tactics." But although I did initially hesitate to subject myself to her interrogation, in the end I decided to indulge her. Her questions, I was willing to answer. Her follow-up attacks are unworthy of a response.
I understand that Lyndi is unhappy and upset. The political and societal winds are blowing the wrong way for her. But she needs to find a better way to deal with that, than to go after people personally because they disagree with her views.
I love the behind the back right in her face gossipy thing you do, Catcher. It's you getting in touch with your girly side, isn't it?
Good job!
==

For someone who loves the friendly people and the beautiful beaches and nice weather of CA you sure seem to spend alot of time indoors evaluating people on Topix. What are you up to now...15-20-25 hours a week on these threads? Yikes!

But don't you worry about me finding other things to do. I am heading out again on Thursday and politics will not be on my mind..... until I get back.

Save me a seat at the bar.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#158883 Feb 3, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh well in that case, how nice it would've been for you to be hangin' around in here when GW Bush was being ripped apart pretty much daily, by liberal "attack dogs" and posters abroad, irate with his foreign policy.
Or maybe you could've helped dispell concusions that Bush was a mental midget because of his many public misspeaks.
We could've used your sensible detente over the years to help calm the fears of those lashing out and encouraging radical behavior such as the maniac throwing his shoes at Bush's head.
And lets not forget your potential roll in reversing the call by many in the US and around the world to have BushCo tried and executed for war crimes. Ay alas & alack it was not to be.
Bravo!

Wild foot stomping applause !
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#158884 Feb 3, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Nice use of a talking point - it's just clever enough to make the willing believe it's in any way a response to anything I said.
"You didn't build that" is precisely the same thing you just said Willie......only YOU called the belief that we did build this nation, "a myth and an illusion." And if that were a fact, there would be no need for history books, bubba-loo!
Try again.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#158885 Feb 3, 2013
Pernrider wrote:
<quoted text>
When someone presents their view with clarity, does not bash another's religion but simply sets forth the view that he sees America as based on certain values that he sees as being undermined by certain disregard, should not bring about the vehemence that was aimed at Prager. His views were not anti social nor abhorrent. They are a legitimate opinion. Does Willie have a right to his opinion, yes absolutely, is it rational. I don't think so. He refuses to meet the argument on its grounds and rushes in to name calling. It's knee jerk at its basest level.
The same for the so called lawyer. I would think that someone who makes his living in a courtroom using words and facts as his tools of the trade would have done a better job than just name calling.
Give a reasoned argument or look like one who is afraid of those who think differently. What do you call those people? The word escapes me.
I was more than willing to meet the argument on its grounds, Pern. I tried in post #158618.

You zipped right past my attempt to meet the arguments on its grounds in your haste to portray me as intolerant.

I identified at least three sections of Prager's essay I found wanting. I guess the problem was that I used terms you didn't like but that I felt appropriate (nonsense, absurd, ludicrous).

I used those terms because I felt the exaggerations and distortions in Prager's essay meet the criteria. There's no way a Muslim swearing into Congress on the Koran is a greater threat to American civilization than 9/11, just to use one example.

I also think that the lack of intemperate language doesn't disguise the fact that the essay was nothing more than an attack on Ellison's religion. That's the only reason for those exaggerations and distortions.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 3 min Hidingfromyou 773,497
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 3 min Epiphany2 604,744
Kokopelli's Place, too (Jan '08) 4 min Ricky F 23,957
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 9 min Rick in Kansas 264,982
Technical Levent Profilo Levent Servis 342 OO 2... 10 min tenzanen 1
Magoo's Bar and grill (Jul '07) 11 min Ricky F 4,992
ye olde village pub (Jun '07) 15 min Ricky F 53,249
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 15 min Estelle 558,858
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 3 hr Dolphin 441,751
More from around the web