A Muslim and a Professor Argue… The UCSD Student admits she is FOR the eradication of ALL Jews.

[The Rabbi]

It was Hitler's belief system that was prevalent in Germany.

No, it wasn't.

Hitler's "belief system" was a tool of his government. Not the other way around.

Wrong.
His government existed to carry out his beliefs.

Most of the "beliefs" of the Nazi Party came from people other than Hitler.

So? That is irrelevant. They were Hitler's beliefs and he used the state to carry them out. Like the Holocaust. The Holocaust was completely irrational from a purely statecraft perspective. It used up valuable resources in wartime against a people who were not a threat. The only explanation is it was driven by Hitler's ideology.
You're really failing badly here. Something about defending anti semites and murderers perhaps.

Again with the anti-Semite card.

You dont think Hitler and the Nazis were anti-semites? Seriously? Your credibility is crumbling with every post. I'd suggest abandoning this thread.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I love it when you guys try to play the anti-semite card. It's almost as good as the 9/11 card.

That is only "clear" to you because that's what you want to see. You want her to be an evil villain, a bogeyman for you to be afraid of - so that's what you see.

I see a kid being railroaded into making a statement she didn't think through, and then apologizing for it.

She didn't think through the fact that she was speaking to a famous journalist in a venue that was being recorded before she blurted out the truth.

David Horowitz isn't a "journalist", either.

Other than that, yes. That's exactly what I'm saying.

Does it matter?

He was a fellow that got a Muslim college student to admit that she supports the extermination of the Jews.

You are defending the indefensible.

Or so it seems, at first glance.

That's the point, right there.

He got her to say it.

People say things they don't mean, or don't think through, in the heat of a confrontation.

No, Doc, sometimes, when pressed far enough, they speak from their hearts, and not from their heads.

Speaking from the heart reveals the inner truth about the person... what they truly think... what they truly feel... without the filters.

Personally, I think it the fellow did an excellent yoeman's job of getting that college student to speak from her heart.

Revealing her innermost self, in this context.

A regular Rembrandt of Revelation, in this case... an excellent job... well done.

You see what you want to see, because you want her to be the villain you're so afraid of.

Sometimes when people are pressed they'll "reveal the inner truth". Sometimes they'll end up saying something they don't mean.

 

[Carib Gyal]

If they're not afraid, they should be. 12 of their colleagues are dead. They can thank the liberals who thought it was a good idea to import 7 million Muslims into the country for that.

Of course, as a conservative, you think that everyone should be scared. That's why you could never work for a place like Charlie Hebdo.

I think people should be scared when there is something to fear. You, on the other hand, think people should be concerned when 12 of their colleagues get gunned down in a massacre.

Fools leap where angels fear to tread.

When there is something to fear. That's the key.

Remember the "yellow peril"?

Militant Islam is FAR more dangerous.

The Yellow Peril never blew up two of our skyscrapers nor suicide-rammed the Pentagon nor crashed an airliner into a Pennsylvania airfield nor killed 3,000 Americans upon our own soil.

Faux comparison.

Apples and oranges.

Faux comparison is correct.

A handful of Al Quada Terrorists committed that act - one terrorist act with a huge toll. One event on American soil.

Let me remind you prior to that the biggest loss of life in a single terrorist attack on US soil was Oklahoma City, and event undertaken by a rightwing extremist.

In fact, when it comes to terrorist attacks on US soil aimed at human life...well...who takes the cake?

I think maybe you should be concerned about rightwingers.

Warning Label: Judicious amount of sarcasm included in this message may cause an anaphylactic reaction in susceptable readers.

I think most Americans will be happy when all muslim murderers are in the same place that Timothy McVeigh is.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I love it when you guys try to play the anti-semite card. It's almost as good as the 9/11 card.

That is only "clear" to you because that's what you want to see. You want her to be an evil villain, a bogeyman for you to be afraid of - so that's what you see.

I see a kid being railroaded into making a statement she didn't think through, and then apologizing for it.

She didn't think through the fact that she was speaking to a famous journalist in a venue that was being recorded before she blurted out the truth.

David Horowitz isn't a "journalist", either.

Other than that, yes. That's exactly what I'm saying.

Does it matter?

He was a fellow that got a Muslim college student to admit that she supports the extermination of the Jews.

You are defending the indefensible.

Or so it seems, at first glance.

That's the point, right there.

He got her to say it.

People say things they don't mean, or don't think through, in the heat of a confrontation.

Wow. Just wow. So now any statement can be explained away as merely being made in the heat of confrontation? Or does it just apply to jew-hating?

You're not even Jewish, are you?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

No, it wasn't.

Hitler's "belief system" was a tool of his government. Not the other way around.

Wrong.
His government existed to carry out his beliefs.

Most of the "beliefs" of the Nazi Party came from people other than Hitler.

So? That is irrelevant. They were Hitler's beliefs and he used the state to carry them out. Like the Holocaust. The Holocaust was completely irrational from a purely statecraft perspective. It used up valuable resources in wartime against a people who were not a threat. The only explanation is it was driven by Hitler's ideology.
You're really failing badly here. Something about defending anti semites and murderers perhaps.

Again with the anti-Semite card.

You dont think Hitler and the Nazis were anti-semites? Seriously? Your credibility is crumbling with every post. I'd suggest abandoning this thread.

I was talking about you implying that I was an anti-Semite.

But you knew that.

 

[Coyote]

No you're afraid because you're a conservative.

Charlie Hebdo is publishing Muhommad on the cover of their next issue because they're NOT afraid. And that's because they are and have always been extremely liberal.

If they're not afraid, they should be. 12 of their colleagues are dead. They can thank the liberals who thought it was a good idea to import 7 million Muslims into the country for that.

Of course, as a conservative, you think that everyone should be scared. That's why you could never work for a place like Charlie Hebdo.

I think people should be scared when there is something to fear. You, on the other hand, think people should be concerned when 12 of their colleagues get gunned down in a massacre.

Fools leap where angels fear to tread.

When there is something to fear. That's the key.

Remember the "yellow peril"?

That was before the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, right?

The "yellow peril" was coined in the 1890's and referred to the Chinese, who we were importing in huge numbers to die in our country building railroads.

Pearl Harbor was an attack by the Japanese.

 

[Kondor3]

If they're not afraid, they should be. 12 of their colleagues are dead. They can thank the liberals who thought it was a good idea to import 7 million Muslims into the country for that.

Of course, as a conservative, you think that everyone should be scared. That's why you could never work for a place like Charlie Hebdo.

I think people should be scared when there is something to fear. You, on the other hand, think people should be concerned when 12 of their colleagues get gunned down in a massacre.

Fools leap where angels fear to tread.

When there is something to fear. That's the key.

Remember the "yellow peril"?

Militant Islam is FAR more dangerous.

The Yellow Peril never blew up two of our skyscrapers nor suicide-rammed the Pentagon nor crashed an airliner into a Pennsylvania airfield nor killed 3,000 Americans upon our own soil.

Faux comparison.

Apples and oranges.

Faux comparison is correct.

A handful of Al Quada Terrorists committed that act - one terrorist act with a huge toll. One event on American soil.

Let me remind you prior to that the biggest loss of life in a single terrorist attack on US soil was Oklahoma City, and event undertaken by a rightwing extremist.

In fact, when it comes to terrorist attacks on US soil aimed at human life...well...who takes the cake?

I think maybe you should be concerned about rightwingers.

Warning Label: Judicious amount of sarcasm included in this message may cause an anaphylactic reaction in susceptable readers.

Doesn't matter, what happened in Oklahoma City.

We're talking now about Muslim terrorism.

But glad you enjoyed the faux comparison bit.

A good ol' standby, when somebody tries to get away with comparing the Yellow Peril to the dangers of Militant Islam.

 

[Carib Gyal]

She didn't think through the fact that she was speaking to a famous journalist in a venue that was being recorded before she blurted out the truth.

David Horowitz isn't a "journalist", either.

Other than that, yes. That's exactly what I'm saying.

Does it matter?

He was a fellow that got a Muslim college student to admit that she supports the extermination of the Jews.

You are defending the indefensible.

Or so it seems, at first glance.

That's the point, right there.

He got her to say it.

People say things they don't mean, or don't think through, in the heat of a confrontation.

Wow. Just wow. So now any statement can be explained away as merely being made in the heat of confrontation? Or does it just apply to jew-hating?

You're not even Jewish, are you?

Most Americans weren't when they annihilated Hitler's Jew killing machine.

 

[The Rabbi]

Wrong.
His government existed to carry out his beliefs.

Most of the "beliefs" of the Nazi Party came from people other than Hitler.

So? That is irrelevant. They were Hitler's beliefs and he used the state to carry them out. Like the Holocaust. The Holocaust was completely irrational from a purely statecraft perspective. It used up valuable resources in wartime against a people who were not a threat. The only explanation is it was driven by Hitler's ideology.
You're really failing badly here. Something about defending anti semites and murderers perhaps.

Again with the anti-Semite card.

You dont think Hitler and the Nazis were anti-semites? Seriously? Your credibility is crumbling with every post. I'd suggest abandoning this thread.

I was talking about you implying that I was an anti-Semite.

But you knew that.

Were you part of the Nazi Party? Because that's what this discussion has been in this little part.
Although I have to say seeing a suppsoed adult defend raw anti-semitism on a college campus is a little startling and I wonder how much you actually agree with her.
Are you willing to condemn Hamas?

 

[Coyote]

Of course, as a conservative, you think that everyone should be scared. That's why you could never work for a place like Charlie Hebdo.

I think people should be scared when there is something to fear. You, on the other hand, think people should be concerned when 12 of their colleagues get gunned down in a massacre.

Fools leap where angels fear to tread.

When there is something to fear. That's the key.

Remember the "yellow peril"?

Militant Islam is FAR more dangerous.

The Yellow Peril never blew up two of our skyscrapers nor suicide-rammed the Pentagon nor crashed an airliner into a Pennsylvania airfield nor killed 3,000 Americans upon our own soil.

Faux comparison.

Apples and oranges.

Faux comparison is correct.

A handful of Al Quada Terrorists committed that act - one terrorist act with a huge toll. One event on American soil.

Let me remind you prior to that the biggest loss of life in a single terrorist attack on US soil was Oklahoma City, and event undertaken by a rightwing extremist.

In fact, when it comes to terrorist attacks on US soil aimed at human life...well...who takes the cake?

I think maybe you should be concerned about rightwingers.

Warning Label: Judicious amount of sarcasm included in this message may cause an anaphylactic reaction in susceptable readers.

I think most Americans will be happy when all muslim murderers are in the same place that Timothy McVeigh is.

Just Muslim murderers? Personally, I think all murderers suck.

 

[The Rabbi]

If they're not afraid, they should be. 12 of their colleagues are dead. They can thank the liberals who thought it was a good idea to import 7 million Muslims into the country for that.

Of course, as a conservative, you think that everyone should be scared. That's why you could never work for a place like Charlie Hebdo.

I think people should be scared when there is something to fear. You, on the other hand, think people should be concerned when 12 of their colleagues get gunned down in a massacre.

Fools leap where angels fear to tread.

When there is something to fear. That's the key.

Remember the "yellow peril"?

That was before the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, right?

The "yellow peril" was coined in the 1890's and referred to the Chinese, who we were importing in huge numbers to die in our country building railroads.

Pearl Harbor was an attack by the Japanese.

Another red herring disposed of.

How many Chinese people rioted and killed innocent journalists? How many beheaded American aid workers or reporters?
OK I think we've disposed of that.

 

[Carib Gyal]

I think people should be scared when there is something to fear. You, on the other hand, think people should be concerned when 12 of their colleagues get gunned down in a massacre.

Fools leap where angels fear to tread.

When there is something to fear. That's the key.

Remember the "yellow peril"?

Militant Islam is FAR more dangerous.

The Yellow Peril never blew up two of our skyscrapers nor suicide-rammed the Pentagon nor crashed an airliner into a Pennsylvania airfield nor killed 3,000 Americans upon our own soil.

Faux comparison.

Apples and oranges.

Faux comparison is correct.

A handful of Al Quada Terrorists committed that act - one terrorist act with a huge toll. One event on American soil.

Let me remind you prior to that the biggest loss of life in a single terrorist attack on US soil was Oklahoma City, and event undertaken by a rightwing extremist.

In fact, when it comes to terrorist attacks on US soil aimed at human life...well...who takes the cake?

I think maybe you should be concerned about rightwingers.

Warning Label: Judicious amount of sarcasm included in this message may cause an anaphylactic reaction in susceptable readers.

I think most Americans will be happy when all muslim murderers are in the same place that Timothy McVeigh is.

Just Muslim murderers? Personally, I think all murderers suck.

But you enjoy sucking. Irony isn't lost on me.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Most of the "beliefs" of the Nazi Party came from people other than Hitler.

So? That is irrelevant. They were Hitler's beliefs and he used the state to carry them out. Like the Holocaust. The Holocaust was completely irrational from a purely statecraft perspective. It used up valuable resources in wartime against a people who were not a threat. The only explanation is it was driven by Hitler's ideology.
You're really failing badly here. Something about defending anti semites and murderers perhaps.

Again with the anti-Semite card.

You dont think Hitler and the Nazis were anti-semites? Seriously? Your credibility is crumbling with every post. I'd suggest abandoning this thread.

I was talking about you implying that I was an anti-Semite.

But you knew that.

Were you part of the Nazi Party? Because that's what this discussion has been in this little part.
Although I have to say seeing a suppsoed adult defend raw anti-semitism on a college campus is a little startling and I wonder how much you actually agree with her.
Are you willing to condemn Hamas?

Of course.

 

[The Rabbi]

She didn't think through the fact that she was speaking to a famous journalist in a venue that was being recorded before she blurted out the truth.

David Horowitz isn't a "journalist", either.

Other than that, yes. That's exactly what I'm saying.

Does it matter?

He was a fellow that got a Muslim college student to admit that she supports the extermination of the Jews.

You are defending the indefensible.

Or so it seems, at first glance.

That's the point, right there.

He got her to say it.

People say things they don't mean, or don't think through, in the heat of a confrontation.

Wow. Just wow. So now any statement can be explained away as merely being made in the heat of confrontation? Or does it just apply to jew-hating?

You're not even Jewish, are you?

Youv'e lost when you start having to deflect with ad homs.

 

[Coyote]

Of course, as a conservative, you think that everyone should be scared. That's why you could never work for a place like Charlie Hebdo.

I think people should be scared when there is something to fear. You, on the other hand, think people should be concerned when 12 of their colleagues get gunned down in a massacre.

Fools leap where angels fear to tread.

When there is something to fear. That's the key.

Remember the "yellow peril"?

Militant Islam is FAR more dangerous.

The Yellow Peril never blew up two of our skyscrapers nor suicide-rammed the Pentagon nor crashed an airliner into a Pennsylvania airfield nor killed 3,000 Americans upon our own soil.

Faux comparison.

Apples and oranges.

Faux comparison is correct.

A handful of Al Quada Terrorists committed that act - one terrorist act with a huge toll. One event on American soil.

Let me remind you prior to that the biggest loss of life in a single terrorist attack on US soil was Oklahoma City, and event undertaken by a rightwing extremist.

In fact, when it comes to terrorist attacks on US soil aimed at human life...well...who takes the cake?

I think maybe you should be concerned about rightwingers.

Warning Label: Judicious amount of sarcasm included in this message may cause an anaphylactic reaction in susceptable readers.

Doesn't matter, what happened in Oklahoma City.

We're talking now about Muslim terrorism.

But glad you enjoyed the faux comparison bit.

A good ol' standby, when somebody tries to get away with comparing the Yellow Peril to the dangers of Militant Islam.

Oh...I'm sure that the fomenters of the yellow peril believed just as strongly as you do in the dangers of the average Asian to American values, mom, apple pie, reproductive demographics and everything else. The rhetoric stands tall as does the whipping up of fear and hate regardless of the individuals targeted.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

David Horowitz isn't a "journalist", either.

Other than that, yes. That's exactly what I'm saying.

Does it matter?

He was a fellow that got a Muslim college student to admit that she supports the extermination of the Jews.

You are defending the indefensible.

Or so it seems, at first glance.

That's the point, right there.

He got her to say it.

People say things they don't mean, or don't think through, in the heat of a confrontation.

Wow. Just wow. So now any statement can be explained away as merely being made in the heat of confrontation? Or does it just apply to jew-hating?

You're not even Jewish, are you?

Youv'e lost when you start having to deflect with ad homs.

It's not an ad-hom, it's a question.

I'm pretty sure I remember you posting that you weren't Jewish years ago, and I wanted to confirm.

 

[R.D.]

I love it when you guys try to play the anti-semite card. It's almost as good as the 9/11 card.

That is only "clear" to you because that's what you want to see. You want her to be an evil villain, a bogeyman for you to be afraid of - so that's what you see.

I see a kid being railroaded into making a statement she didn't think through, and then apologizing for it.

She didn't think through the fact that she was speaking to a famous journalist in a venue that was being recorded before she blurted out the truth.

David Horowitz isn't a "journalist", either.

Other than that, yes. That's exactly what I'm saying.

Your persuasive arguments are starting to sway me. I think perhaps it is a good idea to exterminate all the Jews.

Of course, maybe the rhetoric on an internet message board has tricked me into saying that. I don't believe you are a real doctor, so that makes it a-ok.

I love it when you guys try to play the anti-semite card. It's almost as good as the 9/11 card.

That is only "clear" to you because that's what you want to see. You want her to be an evil villain, a bogeyman for you to be afraid of - so that's what you see.

I see a kid being railroaded into making a statement she didn't think through, and then apologizing for it.

She didn't think through the fact that she was speaking to a famous journalist in a venue that was being recorded before she blurted out the truth.

David Horowitz isn't a "journalist", either.

Other than that, yes. That's exactly what I'm saying.

...including that "she blurted out the truth"?

Apologies, I didn't read that post as closely as I should have.

No, I don't agree that she "blurted out the truth".

I believe she blurted out what David Horowitz and you guys really, really want to be the truth.

That sounds just as much like back-peddling as does her written retraction of what she actually said on video.

Exactly.

 

[Coyote]

Of course, as a conservative, you think that everyone should be scared. That's why you could never work for a place like Charlie Hebdo.

I think people should be scared when there is something to fear. You, on the other hand, think people should be concerned when 12 of their colleagues get gunned down in a massacre.

Fools leap where angels fear to tread.

When there is something to fear. That's the key.

Remember the "yellow peril"?

That was before the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, right?

The "yellow peril" was coined in the 1890's and referred to the Chinese, who we were importing in huge numbers to die in our country building railroads.

Pearl Harbor was an attack by the Japanese.

Another red herring disposed of.

How many Chinese people rioted and killed innocent journalists? How many beheaded American aid workers or reporters?
OK I think we've disposed of that.

How many millions of Muslims are there around the world? So you define them all by a handful of extremists.

That's how this thing usually works - typical "appeal to emotion" fallacy, with the emotion being fear.

 

[Carib Gyal]

Does it matter?

He was a fellow that got a Muslim college student to admit that she supports the extermination of the Jews.

You are defending the indefensible.

Or so it seems, at first glance.

That's the point, right there.

He got her to say it.

People say things they don't mean, or don't think through, in the heat of a confrontation.

Wow. Just wow. So now any statement can be explained away as merely being made in the heat of confrontation? Or does it just apply to jew-hating?

You're not even Jewish, are you?

Youv'e lost when you start having to deflect with ad homs.

It's not an ad-hom, it's a question.

I'm pretty sure I remember you posting that you weren't Jewish years ago, and I wanted to confirm.

He's a rabbi and you're a doctor. Next question.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

That's the point, right there.

He got her to say it.

People say things they don't mean, or don't think through, in the heat of a confrontation.

Wow. Just wow. So now any statement can be explained away as merely being made in the heat of confrontation? Or does it just apply to jew-hating?

You're not even Jewish, are you?

Youv'e lost when you start having to deflect with ad homs.

It's not an ad-hom, it's a question.

I'm pretty sure I remember you posting that you weren't Jewish years ago, and I wanted to confirm.

He's a rabbi and you're a doctor. Next question.

I'm not a doctor.