|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
posted August 06, 2010 08:50 PM |
|
|
Oh, is that so ?
Then, just in case you missed my post from page 3, here are some questions to you :
Quote:
blizz,
From your tone in the initial post - since you never asked anything in this thread, but a rhetorical question to me in this page; check for question marks - you have answers to everything related to this matter and you are interested in whether or not an investigation towards this guy is a good or bad thing. You are against the investigation; this is what you imply at least, although you never made the statement. What you didn't tell us, is your stance on the mosque. Does it matter at all to you how this construction is lanced ? Do you have a question at all about anything related to this matter ? Oh, can you please remind me what NSA stands for and what do people do there ?
Do you care to answer, or are you going to hide again for a few days ?
____________
The empty set
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 09:05 PM |
|
|
lol @ you thinking I was hiding.
Yeah, I'm against the investigation because as I've already went through, there's just no merit to conduct one in the first place. "We're mad about it because the hijackers were also Muslim" is a non-merit reason and by default discrimination.
As for other questions about the Mosque, sure I suppose I could come up with some, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the topic. Anybody can ask anybody anything they feel like. I could ask the circumference of their dicks if I wanted to, but it's their discretion if they choose to answer or not. There have already been questions given about the mosque and they have answered them. What's going on now is not in anyway a Q&A; it's an attempt to conduct an investigation on them, as though they were a suspect, which they're not. Not only is it not the government's business, but this issue is harming the goodwill among Muslim Americans, which is the last thing we want.
And I don't know where you're leading asking me what NSA stands for.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 09:11 PM |
|
Edited by dimis at 21:11, 06 Aug 2010.
|
NSA goes to your beloved "freedom" and right to investigate the guy.
And yes, you, just like JJ, you are cowards to answer the real questions. Well, I didn't expect much more ... What do you know ? You never asked about anything. You are just ignoring so many things and at the same time you answer with arrogance. It is a pity ...
____________
The empty set
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 09:21 PM |
|
|
lulz
I answered every question you asked except "Don't you have questions about the Mosque?" because I refuse to go down a train of thought that is irrelevant to whether there should be an investigation or not. I don't live in New York and I care little what is put there. I'd prefer something that suits the commercial atmosphere, but at the same time I'm not about to lose sleep over it.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 09:34 PM |
|
|
Quote:
but this issue is harming the goodwill among Muslim Americans
And building the mosque there is harming the goodwill of the majority of the rest of Americans, which is a hell of a lot more people. The majority of Americans are against it, and more importantly, the majority of New Yorkers are against it. That reason alone is enough reason to not build it.
Some people act like it's almost some kind of benevolent gesture to build the mosque, like it's some peace offering to improve relations. Since when does a benevolent gesture begin by cramming something down the throat of people when the majority of those people clearly don't want it? That's not benevolence, it's provocation.
If they were to say "I'm sorry, I didn't realize you felt so strongly about it, we'll build it someplace else." Now THAT would be a benevolent gesture. Knowingly pissing off millions of people is NOT.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 09:41 PM |
|
|
This is very very banal, but if the majority of americans (let's just assume I live in the US) was against me going on the toilet, should it also be illegal for me to use toilets?
In my opinion, there are matters where the majority decides and there are matters that's up to the individual and none business of the majority.
In my opinion, it's up to majority, only if government is involved [like with financial aid]. Otherwise, as long as not against the law, then a person can do whatever they want with their private property.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 09:47 PM |
|
|
|
Geez, guys. The issue of legality is a red herring. You shouldn't be arguing over legality.
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 09:48 PM |
|
|
This is just going in circles and you completely fail to miss the point. Just because someone is legally allowed to do something doesn't mean they should. As far as I know, no one in this thread has questioned the legality of it, that has absolutely nothing to do with it.
The issue is that they are knowingly performing an action that will piss off a lot of people. They have a CHOICE in taking that action. And it's a very unwise choice.
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 09:51 PM |
|
|
@Bin:
To clarify, the fact that it's harming the goodwill of Muslim Americans is a bad side-effect, not a justification in itself.
Sure, on the flip side, it's harming the goodwill of most 3rd+ generation Americans, but 3rd+ generation Americans can actually call their country their home, and as a rule, they ***** and moan about everything. Next month they'll be crying over something else ridiculous. It's a sport.
Muslim Americans are inevitably left feeling alienated, and that alienation become much worse when you have a government and culture that is hostile to them.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 09:57 PM |
|
|
Quote:
This is just going in circles and you completely fail to miss the point.
I'm sorry if you feel that, that's not my intention.
Quote:
Just because someone is legally allowed to do something doesn't mean they should.
No, but it does mean it's their decision if they should or shouldn't.
Quote:
The issue is that they are knowingly performing an action that will piss off a lot of people. They have a CHOICE in taking that action. And it's a very unwise choice.
In my opinion, the responsibility are really on the shoulders of those who gets provocated. Everyone have a responsibility of how they feel (I see feeling provocation as a feeling/emotion), and it should not be these peoples responsibility that millions of people apparently cannot control their feelings. That should be the responsibility of the people who cannot control their feelings sufficiently to not feel provocated, by something that's, in my opinion, completely irrelevant to what happened ~9 years ago.
To me, it's much like the choice of where you want to live. No matter what country you decide, there'll always be taxes. So there really isn't much freedom in the concept "either you'll get taxed, or you'll live in another country", because you'll get taxed everywhere.
You see, here I think it's the wrong way of looking at it, sure you've a choice, you can move to another country, but the problem is still there. Those who really have the choice, are those who're oppressing in the first place, those who in my attempt to make an anology puts on taxes and in this case in general, those people who'd be provoced by building the mosque at ground zero.
If they do not accept the feeling of being provoced, then suddenly there's no problem, right? I know it's very easy to write, and probably very hard to do in reality, but it's just to show, that I really don't think the responsibility, or as you put it, the sole choice, should be placed on the shoulders of those who want to build the mosque. They should be able to choose freely, and if anyone feels provoced, it should be their own responsibility to deal with it.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 10:06 PM |
|
|
Apparently I didn't play my role very well.
You guys, who believe that there is no thing that you have the right to do but you shouldn't have contradicted yourselves.
And Binabik, will you at some point log in and read my message ?
____________
The empty set
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 10:14 PM |
|
Edited by dimis at 03:19, 07 Aug 2010.
|
Quote:
If you have the right, THERE IS NO SHOULD NOT.
If there was, you shouldn't have the right in the first place.
Quote:
I have a problem, though, when you make a claim (not answering everything), and when asked to say which, you come up with "patience, let's answer to the others first". In that case you could have just saved your comment (you didn't answer everything) and start your answering post with it.
I totally agree with you there JJ, however it was my right. So, what you are saying now, is that I shouldn't have done it. So, there is at least one thing (what I did above), that I have the right to do, but I should not. Are we together now ? There are things that we have the right to do, but still, should not be done.
Actually, I was kind of lucky, because I had the feeling by others (not just you) earlier that they were condescending, so I thought I could pay them with the same coin. Apparently the flow of posts wasn't fast enough.
Anyway, I sincerely apologize to all whom I responded in the last two pages. My intention was to create more counter-examples. Well ... that's it for now.
Oh, yes, I sent two messages; one to Binabik and one to ihor, *before* I start the peculiar behavior. It can be verified because of the time-stamp.
Btw, my comment above had some truth. I was referring to this part of the answer, as being unanswered:
Quote:
Quote:
It is amazing that you don't see anything hostile or at least suspicious in the way many-many muslims interpret the word "jihad".
Oh? Is that a fact? Of course you can support that claim, can you?
____________
The empty set
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 10:35 PM |
|
|
I'd just like to point out, that to me, there's an important difference between saying someone should not do something, and suggest someone not to do something.
The suggestion clearly indicates that "hey it's your decision", while saying you shouldn't more indicates that it's a wrong thing to do.
There's no doubt that everyone is in their right to do some, in my opinion, incredible stupid things, which I highly suggest they don't do, however I'm not going to say they should, or shouldn't do it, that'll be up to them, as long as it's their right.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted August 06, 2010 10:37 PM |
|
|
Ideally, I would. I'd tell them "Hey, this decision sucks". You should tell people what they shouldn't do.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 07, 2010 08:15 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
If you have the right, THERE IS NO SHOULD NOT.
If there was, you shouldn't have the right in the first place.
Quote:
I have a problem, though, when you make a claim (not answering everything), and when asked to say which, you come up with "patience, let's answer to the others first". In that case you could have just saved your comment (you didn't answer everything) and start your answering post with it.
I totally agree with you there JJ, however it was my right. So, what you are saying now, is that I shouldn't have done it. So, there is at least one thing (what I did above), that I have the right to do, but I should not. Are we together now ? There are things that we have the right to do, but still, should not be done.
Actually, I was kind of lucky, because I had the feeling by others (not just you) earlier that they were condescending, so I thought I could pay them with the same coin. Apparently the flow of posts wasn't fast enough.
Anyway, I sincerely apologize to all whom I responded in the last two pages. My intention was to create more counter-examples. Well ... that's it for now.
Except that you created the situation YOURSELF, which is why your efforts are in vain. YOU basically created the "you didn't answer" crap and YOU then chose not to answer. That's TWICE YOU.
The ACTUAL situation, however, is that it's TWO DIFFERENT people or sides who do something, and if you let, say, BINABIK, say the first part - you didn't answer questions - and YOU take the second, taking your time with answering posts, the situation looks quite different.
So with your demonstration you just managed - yet again - to equal the terrorists with the American muslims.
If you just MY quote now, you provoked me - you have the right -, but I never said, you shouldn't do that. I said I have a problem with that, and that problem stems from the fact that I had expected a serious point and just saw bullsnowting.
Nevertheless - would I take action against you becauser of that?
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 07, 2010 08:37 AM |
|
|
Quote:
The majority of Americans are against it, and more importantly, the majority of New Yorkers are against it. That reason alone is enough reason to not build it.
Who cares about what the majority thinks?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted August 07, 2010 09:02 AM |
|
|
It's not a matter of who DOES care, but who SHOULD care. And the people who want to build the mosque should care. And if they don't care and build it anyway, the message they are sending is that they give a **** what the majority of people think. And that's a real good way to piss off a hell of a lot of people.
|
|
bixie
Promising
Legendary Hero
my common sense is tingling!
|
|
posted August 07, 2010 09:26 AM |
|
|
I think everyone knows that the mosque is going to be built 2 blocks away from the WTC. And that there is a christian church a mere 1 block away, who doesn't have a problem with it.
Just saying.
I think what's happened is that a bunch of hysterical idiots are making this into a bigger deal than it should be.
____________
Love, Laugh, Learn, Live.
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted August 07, 2010 09:46 AM |
|
|
Even if that's true, which it's not, who's at fault? The powder keg or the one who throws a match in it?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 07, 2010 09:54 AM |
|
|
Just out of interest, I started to look into religious TV channels in the US - interesting read. Some excerpts from Wiki, simply going down the list of channels.
Daystar Television:
Quote:
Daystar is currently under investigation by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), centering on allegations that Daystar has sold air time on its non-commercial educational stations to for-profit groups. The act of selling non-commercial air-time is a violation of FCC rules regulating NCE-licensed stations. The investigation, started in 2003, previously complicated Daystar's $21.5M bid for KOCE-TV, a PBS-member station in Orange County, California and other license renewals...
Daystar is also facing controversy in Israel, where it became the first foreign Christian network to be granted a broadcasting license by the Israeli government in 2006. The announcement drew criticism from Jewish leaders in both Israel and the United States, who believed the network aimed at converting Jews in Israel through its numerous Messianic Jewish programs. In 2007, the Israeli cable provider HOT announced it would drop Daystar from its lineup, depriving the American ministry of one million Israeli households. HOT claimed that the decision was made after the company received numerous complaints about Daystar's content. Daystar announced it would file a petition with the Israeli Supreme Court to hear the case, accusing HOT of religious discrimination.
Trinity Broadcasting Network
Quote:
Trinity Broadcasting Network has come under heavy criticism for its promotion of the prosperity gospel -- a belief that giving donations to God's work can produce financial blessing from God in the life of the donor, as well as other claims made by Paul Crouch and other prominent TBN personalities...
From 1994 to 2005, evangelist and self-styled Bible prophecy expert Hal Lindsey hosted a program on TBN titled International Intelligence Briefing, in which Lindsey provided news and commentary and aimed to interpret current events into biblical prophecy. Lindsey made remarks on the program that attracted outside criticism, particularly commentaries regarding Arabs and Islam. In December 2005, TBN announced it would be pre-empting International Intelligence Briefing for the entire month, causing Lindsey to send an e-mail to followers accusing TBN management of censorship, saying, "some at the network apparently feel that my message is too pro-Israel and too anti-Muslim." Paul Crouch issued a press release defending TBN's support of Israel and insisting that Lindsey's show was only pre-empted for Christmas programming. Crouch eventually admitted, however, that concerns over whether Lindsey "placed Arabs in a negative light" were a secondary factor in the show's pre-emption. TBN faced criticism from the conservative news website WorldNetDaily for supposedly bowing to the pressure of political correctness.
Lindsey resigned from TBN on January 1, 2006, effectively cancelling International Intelligence Briefing for good. Shortly thereafter on Fox News Channel's Hannity & Colmes, Lindsey indicated that he would not be returning to the network. The following month, Lindsey launched The Hal Lindsey Report, a program similar to International Intelligence Briefing, which initially aired on Sky Angel and Daystar Television Network, but not on TBN. However, on January 22, 2007, TBN announced that Crouch and Lindsey had reconciled and that The Hal Lindsey Report would soon debut on the network.
TBN produces and airs a Christian reality show called Travel the Road, which features missionaries Tim Scott and Will Decker in remote and often war-torn locations overseas in search of converts. In December 2008, the program attracted criticism from the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), a watchdog group that looks for acts of religious discrimination in the United States military. The MRFF claimed that Scott and Decker were embedded with American troops stationed in Afghanistan, despite the fact that, according to MRFF president Mikey Weinstein, the military exercises a "complete prohibition of the proselytizing of any religion, faith, or practice...You see [Scott and Decker] wearing American helmets. It is obvious they were completely embedded." When ABC News contacted the U.S. Army in Afghanistan about Scott and Decker's alleged embed, which had taken place four years previously, they said that they no longer have the documentation of the missionaries' status with the troops.
Scott defended the trip to Afghanistan, telling ABC, "It wasn't like we were hiding in the back saying we're going to preach. [The military] knew what we were doing. We told them that we were born again Christians, we're here doing ministry, we shoot for this TV station and we want to embed and see what it was like. We were interviewing the chaplains and we talked to them. We spoke at the services and things like that. So we did do our mission being over there as far as being able to document what the soldiers go through, what it's like in Afghanistan. So I could say that we were on a secular mission as well as far as documenting. I would say we were news reporters as well, we were delivering news of what was actually happening there, but we were also there to document the Christian side." Scott argued that since the pair were acting as Christian journalists, they had the same right to cover the war in Afghanistan as secular networks.
The Inspiration Network
Quote:
The Inspiration Network, also known as Inspiration, and often referred to by the initials INSP, is a Christian television network headquartered in Indian Land, South Carolina, near Charlotte. It is the flagship network of The Inspiration Networks, which is owned by the Inspiration Ministries. It features family value-based programming, with programs from more than 70 different ministries representing more than 20 different denominations, plus original programming for children, teens, and families.
The network came out of the "Praise The Lord" (PTL) Television Network (also known as PTL - The Inspirational Network), founded in the late 1970s by Jim Bakker, a televangelist notable for his daily Christian variety program, The PTL Club. In 1990, following Bakker's scandalous fall from grace that had bankrupted the PTL ministry and Heritage USA, televangelist Morris Cerullo bought the PTL cable television network for $7 million.
Sky Angel
Quote:
Sky Angel has received a seal of approval by the Parents Television Council for providing "family-friendly television programming."
On April 1, 2008, Sky Angel ceased its satellite television broadcasting and began offering its subscription service programming through a broadband internet connection (Cable or DSL). This essentially ripped off hundreds of consumers who purchased "lifetime subscriptions" to the DBS service, and who received no fair compensation for their investment into the "ministry".
After that I stopped reading.
You may ask now, where is the connection with the actual issue?
I think, if we affiliate the American muslims with 9/11, we can safely affiliate the American Christians with all the rip-offs, discriminations and financial cimes that seem to be the rule with American Christians TV networks - so shouldn't there be an investigation OF THEM ALL, when they want to build a new church somewhere? Can't you safely conclude that Christians are interested in ripping off and religious discrimination only and that church-building is only a trick to rip people off and to discriminate other religions?
I haven't read an answer to the question, yet, whether the American non-muslims were hit harder by 9/11 than the American muslims - or whether the Amrican muslims has been somewhat less shocked about it...
____________
"Nobody dies a virgin ... Life f*cks us all." - Kurt Cobain
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
