Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 12-15-2015, 09:41 AM   #61
Fly Rod
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Fly Rod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Gloucester Massachusetts
Posts: 2,678
Under obama's watch in 2012 a secret policy that barred federal agents from looking at social media post for visa applicants...this policy still stands today....they bar agents but employers R allowed to check U out on social media when applying for a job....durrrr.....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ial-media.html

"When its not about money,it's all about money."...
Fly Rod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2015, 11:28 AM   #62
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 17,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fly Rod View Post
Under obama's watch in 2012 a secret policy that barred federal agents from looking at social media post for visa applicants...this policy still stands today....they bar agents but employers R allowed to check U out on social media when applying for a job....durrrr.....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ial-media.html
This appears to be another story being blown out of proportion.

When an employer checks you out on social media all they can do is potentially view public posts like this one. The killers from California apparently did not make any public remarks on social media about jihad or martyrdom, so there's no way the VISA background checks would have caught it anyway.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2015, 01:17 PM   #63
Slipknot
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
Slipknot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middleboro MA
Posts: 16,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
This appears to be another story being blown out of proportion.

When an employer checks you out on social media all they can do is potentially view public posts like this one. The killers from California apparently did not make any public remarks on social media about jihad or martyrdom, so there's no way the VISA background checks would have caught it anyway.

but the moron isis guy who posted a photo on FB in front of his headquarters sure did some good as in less than 48 hours the place was blown off the face of the earth. trouble is they announced it instead of keeping it quiet so they and the media would not tip off the enemy from more stupidity.

The United States Constitution does not exist to grant you rights; those rights are inherent within you. Rather it exists to frame a limited government so that those natural rights can be exercised freely.
Slipknot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2015, 01:26 PM   #64
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 17,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slipknot View Post
but the moron isis guy who posted a photo on FB in front of his headquarters sure did some good as in less than 48 hours the place was blown off the face of the earth. trouble is they announced it instead of keeping it quiet so they and the media would not tip off the enemy from more stupidity.
Or the Russian soldier forgetting his selfies in Ukraine had location data
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2015, 02:16 PM   #65
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fly Rod View Post
Under obama's watch in 2012 a secret policy that barred federal agents from looking at social media post for visa applicants...this policy still stands today....they bar agents but employers R allowed to check U out on social media when applying for a job....durrrr.....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ial-media.html
Teachers lose jobs , cops lose jobs
Politicians lose jobs all because of posts on social media . I bet if you go adopt a pet, you are vetted and checked out on social media .
I can't imagine why it would be OK to grab peoples phone records but not look at their Facebook .
But then again I still don't understand why you don't need an ID to vote .
This one baffles me too.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2015, 03:11 PM   #66
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 17,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman View Post
I can't imagine why it would be OK to grab peoples phone records but not look at their Facebook .
To grab someone's phone records requires a court order. I don't know if you've ever used Facebook but you'd have to hack into their account, get a warrant or friend them to see anything. That's why this is pretty silly.

How many VISA applicant wannabe jihadis do you think are on open forums like S-B using their real names?
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2015, 04:54 PM   #67
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
To grab someone's phone records requires a court order. I don't know if you've ever used Facebook but you'd have to hack into their account, get a warrant or friend them to see anything. That's why this is pretty silly.

How many VISA applicant wannabe jihadis do you think are on open forums like S-B using their real names?
Which is why it is not unreasonable to suggest a moratorium on immigration. We have had moratoriums (long ones) in the past. We are going to great difficulty to create a fallible process of importing a huge number of refugees into our already over populated economy and social network and safety net, all at the expense and danger to the rest of us. We are going through hoops and pinholes to fight a world wide PR war, and are half-heartedly going about the destruction of the cause for that war.

If it requires a reset of who we are, an Obama transformation, and we cannot defeat the enemy with all-out war, then better to become disentangled with the whole mess and let the rest of the world sort itself out.
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2015, 05:31 PM   #68
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
To grab someone's phone records requires a court order. I don't know if you've ever used Facebook but you'd have to hack into their account, get a warrant or friend them to see anything. That's why this is pretty silly.

How many VISA applicant wannabe jihadis do you think are on open forums like S-B using their real names?
If you think the only people that have access to your Facebook info are your "friends" , you are living in a fantasy world .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2015, 06:00 PM   #69
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 17,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
Which is why it is not unreasonable to suggest a moratorium on immigration. We have had moratoriums (long ones) in the past. We are going to great difficulty to create a fallible process of importing a huge number of refugees into our already over populated economy and social network and safety net, all at the expense and danger to the rest of us. We are going through hoops and pinholes to fight a world wide PR war, and are half-heartedly going about the destruction of the cause for that war.

If it requires a reset of who we are, an Obama transformation, and we cannot defeat the enemy with all-out war, then better to become disentangled with the whole mess and let the rest of the world sort itself out.
I think we allow close to 100,000 refugees per year, so 10,000 isn't exactly a surge. Recently I read the US ranks #14 in amount of refugees taken, so it'a not exactly like we're shouldering the brunt of the load.

The process isn't being created, it already exists and it's not easy. Say 18 months + and I don't believe under international law you get to choose what country you're sent to.

I'm not sure what a moratorium would accomplish beyond just subjecting more people to terrorism.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2015, 06:14 PM   #70
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 17,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman View Post
If you think the only people that have access to your Facebook info are your "friends" , you are living in a fantasy world .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Like who? Name names.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2015, 07:13 PM   #71
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Like who? Name names.
I can't divulge that ...it's classified
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2015, 09:13 PM   #72
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 17,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman View Post
I can't divulge that ...it's classified
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I didn't think so either.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2015, 05:42 AM   #73
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I didn't think so either.
How about Mark Zuckerberg , his company and anybody that has a few dollars to buy some of the information that they harvest from your page

Hell you don't even own the photos that you post up there .

Does it ever dawn on you, when you see the advertisements pop up on your newsfeed , how timely they are with events in your life and the things that you enjoy .

Do you seriously think that's just a coincidence ?

You are a funny guy
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2015, 10:40 AM   #74
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I think we allow close to 100,000 refugees per year, so 10,000 isn't exactly a surge. Recently I read the US ranks #14 in amount of refugees taken, so it'a not exactly like we're shouldering the brunt of the load.

On top of the 100,000+ Syrians entered here since 2012?
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/12/16...-100000-since/


The process isn't being created, it already exists and it's not easy. Say 18 months + and I don't believe under international law you get to choose what country you're sent to.

Are you forgetting one of your favorite causes for process snafu, the ever-present "systemic failure"? Benghazi, police depts., etc.

I'm not sure what a moratorium would accomplish beyond just subjecting more people to terrorism.
Wha . . .? I didn't know that they were being subjected to terrorism in the refugee camps.
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2015, 12:03 PM   #75
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 16,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Like who? Name names.
Kevin Bacon....

You're within 6 degrees of him on facebook....

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2015, 01:24 PM   #76
Raven
........
iTrader: (0)
 
Raven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 22,750
Blog Entries: 1
I can just hear him Sizzle


but....
Raven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2015, 01:38 PM   #77
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 17,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman View Post
How about Mark Zuckerberg , his company and anybody that has a few dollars to buy some of the information that they harvest from your page

Hell you don't even own the photos that you post up there .

Does it ever dawn on you, when you see the advertisements pop up on your newsfeed , how timely they are with events in your life and the things that you enjoy .

Do you seriously think that's just a coincidence ?

You are a funny guy
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Next you're going to be telling me my bank knows exactly how much money in my checking account...like to the penny.

Internet marketing has more to do with the cookies created by product searches or specific product websites that anything else. It's not like someone talking about the metaphysical implications of jihad on Facebook is going to start seeing an "Amazon Pipe Bomb Special" show up in their feed.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2015, 07:56 AM   #78
Fly Rod
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Fly Rod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Gloucester Massachusetts
Posts: 2,678
[QUOTE=spence;1088850]Next you're going to be telling me my bank knows exactly how much money in my checking account...like to the penny.QUOTE]

Spence....U must just do on line banking...when U go into a bank infront of a teller to cash a check from whom ever they look at your checking account, they C how much U have in your account in order to cover the check U R cashing....

"When its not about money,it's all about money."...
Fly Rod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2015, 09:06 AM   #79
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 17,847
Sarcasm.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2015, 10:19 AM   #80
Sea Dangles
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Sea Dangles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,006
Good grief
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Sea Dangles is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2015, 03:01 PM   #81
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Next you're going to be telling me my bank knows exactly how much money in my checking account...like to the penny.

Internet marketing has more to do with the cookies created by product searches or specific product websites that anything else. It's not like someone talking about the metaphysical implications of jihad on Facebook is going to start seeing an "Amazon Pipe Bomb Special" show up in their feed.
Brilliant comparison ! You are a sharp one 😊
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 05:32 PM   #82
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,389
Has the vetting process been reduced to three months?

http://mediamatters.org/video/2016/0...-enough/209814
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 09:58 AM   #83
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 2,187
Despite the prevailing stereotypes of Muslim Americans, Islam has contributed a great deal to the U.S. In fact, Muslims have played an integral part in defending the homeland and fighting for the American government’s geopolitical interests. The history of Muslim Americans serving in the U.S. military challenges the widespread skepticism that Americans have for those who follow Islam. Muslims are asked by Prophet Muhammad to “love your country as [patriotism] is part of Islam.” The Qur’an (4:60) calls on Muslims to be obedient to their governments: “O you who believe, obey God and the Prophet and obey those in authority from among you.” As I discuss in this piece, Muslims have heeded the Prophet’s call for allegiance and shown love for America.

Muslims served in the U.S. military under the command of General George Washington, who was Commander in Chief of the Continental Army during the American War for Independence. Rosters of soldiers serving in Washington’s Army lists names like Bampett Muhammad, who fought for the Virginia Line between the years 1775 and 1783. Another Again it seems many love to focus on the minority not the majority ...

one of Washington’s soldiers, Yusuf Ben Ali, was a North African Arab who worked as an aide to General Thomas Sumter of South Carolina. Peter Buckminster, who fought in Boston, is perhaps Washington’s most distinguished Muslim American soldier. Buckminster fired the gun that killed British Major General John Pitcairn at the Battle of Bunker Hill. Years after this famous battle, Peter changed his last name to “Salaam,” the Arabic word meaning “peace.” Peter Salaam later reenlisted in the Continental Army to serve in the Battle of Saratoga and the Battle of Stony Point. If Washington had a problem with Muslims serving in his Army, he would not have allowed Muhammad, Ali and Salaam to represent and serve non-Muslim Americans. By giving these Muslims the honor of serving America, Washington made it clear that a person did not have to be of a certain religion or have a particular ethnic background to be an American patriot.

And these Contributions to America are still happening to this day from all walks of life.. step back from the emoting and Fear and look at the big picture..

I dont understand killings in the name of Islam is some how different from Killings blamed on MH issues or Racial motivated Mass Murder .. when the latter happens far more frequently Here in the US .. they are all unacceptable ... And we all have far less control over theses events then we'll acknowledge
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 12:05 PM   #84
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Despite the prevailing stereotypes of Muslim Americans, Islam has contributed a great deal to the U.S. In fact, Muslims have played an integral part in defending the homeland and fighting for the American government’s geopolitical interests. The history of Muslim Americans serving in the U.S. military challenges the widespread skepticism that Americans have for those who follow Islam. Muslims are asked by Prophet Muhammad to “love your country as [patriotism] is part of Islam.” The Qur’an (4:60) calls on Muslims to be obedient to their governments: “O you who believe, obey God and the Prophet and obey those in authority from among you.” As I discuss in this piece, Muslims have heeded the Prophet’s call for allegiance and shown love for America.

Muslims served in the U.S. military under the command of General George Washington, who was Commander in Chief of the Continental Army during the American War for Independence. Rosters of soldiers serving in Washington’s Army lists names like Bampett Muhammad, who fought for the Virginia Line between the years 1775 and 1783. Another Again it seems many love to focus on the minority not the majority ...

one of Washington’s soldiers, Yusuf Ben Ali, was a North African Arab who worked as an aide to General Thomas Sumter of South Carolina. Peter Buckminster, who fought in Boston, is perhaps Washington’s most distinguished Muslim American soldier. Buckminster fired the gun that killed British Major General John Pitcairn at the Battle of Bunker Hill. Years after this famous battle, Peter changed his last name to “Salaam,” the Arabic word meaning “peace.” Peter Salaam later reenlisted in the Continental Army to serve in the Battle of Saratoga and the Battle of Stony Point. If Washington had a problem with Muslims serving in his Army, he would not have allowed Muhammad, Ali and Salaam to represent and serve non-Muslim Americans. By giving these Muslims the honor of serving America, Washington made it clear that a person did not have to be of a certain religion or have a particular ethnic background to be an American patriot.

And these Contributions to America are still happening to this day from all walks of life.. step back from the emoting and Fear and look at the big picture..

I dont understand killings in the name of Islam is some how different from Killings blamed on MH issues or Racial motivated Mass Murder .. when the latter happens far more frequently Here in the US .. they are all unacceptable ... And we all have far less control over theses events then we'll acknowledge
Sure, so long as Muslims are a small minority, they will, for the most part, be "patriots" of sorts. Many of them would either be "moderate" Muslims who don't really adhere strictly, or who, if they adhere at all, do it very loosely, to all the Quranic texts. This is just as true for Christians or Jews who are "moderate" in their beliefs. But note what happens to countries when Muslims are in control. And look at what happens when the picture of the "small minority" of so-called extremist or fundamentalist or radical Muslims are not paid enough attention because the big picture of moderate Islam paints a comforting, and fundamentally false, interpretation of Islam.

Muslims are actually allowed, when they are a minority, as a matter of their faith to deceive those in power--referred to as taqiyya. Washington may have had a problem if he had ordered the Muslims to kill invading Muslim regiments.

As for the citation of Quran 4:60, I found this:

[4:60] O ye who believe! obey Allah, and obey His Messenger and those who are in authority among you. And if you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger if you are believers in Allah and the Last Day. That is best and most commendable in the end.
[4:60] اے وہ لوگو جو ایمان لائے ہو! اللہ کی اطاعت کرو اور رسول کی اطاعت کرو اور اپنے حکام کی بھی۔ اور اگر تم کسی معاملہ میں (اُولُوالامر سے) اختلاف کرو تو ایسے معاملے اللہ اور رسول کی طرف لَوٹا دیا کرو اگر (فی الحقیقت) تم اللہ پر اور یومِ آخر پر ایمان لانے والے ہو۔ یہ بہت بہتر (طریق) ہے اور انجام کے لحاظ سے بہت اچھا ہے۔

The attached interpretations of this verse make it clear that the phrase "who are in authority among you," or in other translations "authority over you," has not been properly understood by some. Most translators understand it to mean "from among yourselves" which means you should obey only that authority which happens to be from among yourselves, meaning Muslim authority alone.

I could not copy the interpretation entries which are far more detailed, but the url, which also is: https://www.alislam.org/quran/tafsee...EN,E2&CR=EN,E2

Also, via islamicstudies.info, there is the Sunna 4:60 with its explanation:

(4:60) "(O Messenger!) Have you not seen those who claim to believe in the Book which has been revealed to you and in the Books revealed before you, and yet desire to submit their disputes to the judgement of taghut (the Satanic authorities who decide independently of the Law of Allah), whereas they had been asked to reject it.91 And Satan seeks to make them drift far away from the right way."
The added interpretation: "Taghut clearly signifies here a sovereign who judges things according to criteria other than the law of God. It also stands for a legal and judicial system which acknowledges neither the sovereignty of God nor the paramount authority of the Book of God. This verse categorically proclaims that to refer disputes to the judgement of a court of law which is essentially taghut contravenes the dictates of a believer's faith. In fact, true faith in God and His Book necessarily requires that a man should refuse to recognize the legitimacy of such courts. According to the Qur'an, belief in God necessitates repudiation of the authority of taghut. To try to submit both to God and to taghut at the same time is hypocrisy.

Both sources indicate that the Quran's notion of believers obeying their governments refers to governments that are in accordance to the commands of Allah. Which would be the commandments given in the Quran or the Sunna or the Hadith. In other words, governments that are Islamic in nature.

So the quote you cite, taken out of quranic context, and outside of Islamic law, is very misleading. Actually, the interpretation given by your source to the Quran 4:60 is the opposite of how Islamic scholars interpret the verse.

Both sources are legitimate pro-Islamic scholarship "experts"--al Islam, the official website of the Amadiyyah Muslim Community, and Islamicstudies.info.

Last edited by detbuch; 04-13-2016 at 12:13 PM..
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 12:17 PM   #85
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 2,187
2016 and the Muslims are now finally getting around taking over the world!!!!!

If you think theses extremist are a recent development in world history you guys need to get out more
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 12:19 PM   #86
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
2016 and the Muslims are now finally getting around taking over the world!!!!!

If you think theses extremist are a recent development in world history you guys need to get out more
Is there a point to your sarcastic rant?
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 01:04 PM   #87
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 2,187
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
Is there a point to your sarcastic rant?

No ... just shorter than yours thats all
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 01:11 PM   #88
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 17,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
No ... just shorter than yours thats all
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 07:06 PM   #89
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
No ... just shorter than yours thats all
when you subtract the quotes and opinions of other sources in mine, it is not longer than your first post to which I was responding. I didn't consider your first post to be a rant because it wasn't an extravagant or unreasonable declamation.

I responded in a similar rational, reasonable manner backed by quotes and interpretations of Islamic scholars. I pointed out that "the quote you cite, taken out of quranic context, and outside of Islamic law, is very misleading. Actually, the interpretation given by your source to the Quran 4:60 is the opposite of how Islamic scholars interpret the verse."

Given as that your quote from the Quran was a key element to your post, I thought that my response reasonably refuted the basis of your argument. I believe my post made that point well. And it is part of a much larger point that we uncritically accept laudatory statements about Islam or false interpretations of the Quran by those who want us to believe Islam is something that it isn't. Or who may actually want to believe what they tell us. Or who may intentionally be trying to deceive us.

Now you respond in this post by admitting that your previous one was indeed a rant and did not, actually, have a point. Well done.

BTW, in another thread I asked you if it would be OK if we imposed the same requirements on voting as we do on gun ownership. Would you be good with that?
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2016, 05:33 AM   #90
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 2,187
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
when you subtract the quotes and opinions of other sources in mine, it is not longer than your first post to which I was responding. I didn't consider your first post to be a rant because it wasn't an extravagant or unreasonable declamation.

I responded in a similar rational, reasonable manner backed by quotes and interpretations of Islamic scholars. I pointed out that "the quote you cite, taken out of quranic context, and outside of Islamic law, is very misleading. Actually, the interpretation given by your source to the Quran 4:60 is the opposite of how Islamic scholars interpret the verse."


Isn't that the whole issue with Islam? its those interpretations and the people who do these interpretations.



Given as that your quote from the Quran was a key element to your post, an assumption on your part my point is Muslim Americans have contributed much and have died defending this country and other Americans wish to ignore this basic fact


I thought that my response reasonably refuted the basis of your argument. I believe my post made that point well. And it is part of a much larger point that we uncritically accept laudatory statements about Islam or false interpretations of the Quran by those who want us to believe Islam is something that it isn't. Or who may actually want to believe what they tell us. Or who may intentionally be trying to deceive us.

^^^^^ classic Muslim Bigotry those who want us to believe Islam is something that it isn't. intentionally be trying to deceive us is this political or a religious feeling of yours? ^^^^^^^^^^

Now you respond in this post by admitting that your previous one was indeed a rant and did not, actually, have a point. Well done.

Sorry never admitted anything just kinda para phrased what you think
that islam is taking over the world


BTW, in another thread I asked you if it would be OK if we imposed the same requirements on voting as we do on gun ownership. Would you be good with that?
No not until voting can kill or be used in violent crime or you can use it in Home defense or warfare
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com