Why do Democrats Trivialize The Threat From Radical Islam

[The T]

Go ask all those unborn fetus's out there just how great the threat from liberal idiots is to them.

'cause liberals just love wantonely killing innocent life, for no other reason than it poses an inconvience to 'em.

Sick bastards!

Noting the desparate attempt at deflection.

If the subject is: dems trivialize radical islam and many here are bringing up "all those Christian terrorists" (like, 4 in the last 40 years), isn't that "deflection"?

*Whoops*

 

[logical4u]

Why do Democrats Trivialize The Threat From Radical Islam

Democrats only trivialize Republicans. And with good reason. Republicans trivialize "reason".

Yet, none of these "reasonable" dems will actually list how many people that radical muslims kill compared to how many people "Christian fundies" (as one poster put it) kill (at least in the last two centuries anyway). They are quite willing to list Crusades without mentioning the ME was under attack from .... radical islamists. They are quite willing to mention the "dark age", without comparing what the radical islamists were doing at that time. Please, please be that one, shining example of "dem" reason, and give us an honest try at listing real numbers, not an opinion (from a Chistophobe).

 

[drsmith1072]

Why would anyone tune in? It's not like there's any question.

Nope there is no question that you are and have been dishonest and the proof

http://www.usmessageboard.com/3557841-post2269.html

is there for any and all to see.

LOL

 

[Political Junky]

Osama bin Laden: Bin Laden's death a huge boost for President Obama - latimes.com

 

[drsmith1072]

Spin???? That would be what you did here ...

really?? HOW so?



I did nothing more than you did. You offered yout interpretation of what he said even as you ignored what he actually said. Where as I based my interpretation on what he actually said.
The sad fact is that now you agree with me that you were WRONG when you claimed that he made a comparison because you NOW admit that he didn't even mention radical islam.

If the thread is about "trivializing the threat of islam" and a poster is focusing on Christianity (opinion or fact) without presenting a comparable statement about islam, it is obvious to most of us here that person is "ignoring" or "trivializing" islam. If the thread was about the violence of Christianity, his "opinion" would have been, expected.

So you ARE saying that because he did NOT mention radical islam that he is trivializing the threat of it?? Got it. I knew I had you pegged the first time.

The sad fact is that now you agree with me that you were WRONG when you claimed that he made a comparison because you NOW admit that he didn't even mention radical islam.

First you claimed he was comparing the two religions and then you admit after being called out for being wrong you admit that he didn't make a comparable statement. LOL

Any way that you try to spin it YOU were the one that was proven WRONG based on the shift in your own argument. LOL

I did not state what "he" meant. I said if someone is makes a statement of comparison and doesn't mention the "subject" (of the thread), that person is ignoring or trivializing the subject (in this case it would be .... radical islam). I did not interpret his statement to mean something else; I made an observation.

This is basic reading or communication skills; a person brings up a topic, the other changes the subject, USUALLY means that the person that changed the subject is uncomfortable discussing the topic.

LOL Dude give it up. Your tired attempts to try to change what you meant to say by changing your words AFTER the fact does not change your original statements. Your are now doing the same dishonest crap that you tried earlier when you dishonestly tried to claim that your veiled personal attack was an "invitation" to discuss.

What is even more hilarious is that previously you accused me of spin when I made an "observation" so why doesn't your own standard apply to you??

You said

Spin???? That would be what you did here ... you took a posting and declared the intent of a poster that wasn't you.

but then you follwoed that up by doing the very same thing.

If the thread is about "trivializing the threat of islam" and a poster is focusing on Christianity (opinion or fact) without presenting a comparable statement about islam, it is obvious to most of us here that person is "ignoring" or "trivializing" islam.

By your own words are you not declaring the intent of a poster that wasn't you when you claim that based on your "interpretation/observation" that he was "trivializing" islam??
By your own definition that is spinning.

 

[drsmith1072]

Aren't you (yes, you), the one that is crying to have EVERYTHING spelled out for you??? I cannot determine where your claim for Biblical knowledge starts and where it stops. How can I discuss a subject with you when you claim to have read the Bible, but will not say one way or another if you are familiar with the topic or how in depth your knowledge goes.

So far, I have reviewed that Jacob was re-named Israel by the Lord and that Jacob was Abraham's grandson. I also asked if you were aware of the reception that Esau (who was living in Ishmael's protection/area) gave to Jacob after Jacob left "serving" his father in law for 21+ years with all his animals and his two wives?

WOW how many times does it have to explained to YOU?

YOU made the claim therefore the burden of proof is on YOU.

It is not my responsibility to google anything to substantiate or prove your claims wrong.

Furthermore what does your inability to substantiate your own claims have to do with my knowledge?? Why do you have to test my knowledge BEFORE you can provide some substance to support your own claims??

If you have a point get to it. Otherwise admit that you've got nothing real to offer and stop trying to make this about me when you are the one that made the claims.

You have not responded to your understanding of this particular story, or how familiar you are with this portion of the OT. It does me little good to have a discussion with someone that does not know the story. If you do not know the story, well, you can easily be misled. I do not want to do that. I would like for you to see the obvious, but if we cannot agree on a "reference point" there is no sense in pointing out something if you don't know where to begin to look.

Your inability to make YOUR point has NOTHING to do with me. So IF you actually have a point to make, please make it.

Otherwise just stfu and stop stalking me with your lame attempts to avoid providing substance to support YOUR claim as you try so desperately to make it about me. LOL

 

[AllieBaba]

Why would anyone tune in? It's not like there's any question.

Nope there is no question that you are and have been dishonest and the proof

http://www.usmessageboard.com/3557841-post2269.html

is there for any and all to see.

LOL

Oh yes, the famed mistake about who brought up a topic first.

Yes, that was a terrible lie. Obviously, if I made a mistake about who breached a topic, I must be lying about everything.



what a loser.

 

[MarcATL]

Wasn't Osama THE symbol of Radical Islam?

What did the "leader of the Left" according to RWers, Obama, do with Osama?

Hint: Killed his A$$.

Thread's over.


LoL!

 

[Uncensored2008]

So am I to take your current spin to mean that I am not one of the "cadre"? LOL

If you had any wits you would take it to mean that you are a drooling dolt.

So in other words you are referring to at least two people who disagree with you as nazis?? Got it. LOL

Do you agree with Lasher and bod that the JOOOOOZZZZZ control everything?

 

[bodecea]

So am I to take your current spin to mean that I am not one of the "cadre"? LOL

If you had any wits you would take it to mean that you are a drooling dolt.

So in other words you are referring to at least two people who disagree with you as nazis?? Got it. LOL

Do you agree with Lasher and bod that the JOOOOOZZZZZ control everything?

What? Where in the world have I EVER said anything like that?


(Knowing that you will never, ever be able to prove your comment....just another slimy lie by Uncensored)

 

[Uncensored2008]

What? Where in the world have I EVER said anything like that?


(Knowing that you will never, ever be able to prove your comment....just another slimy lie by Uncensored)

Alright, I'll retract the control portion, you only jumped in on the "Drive em' out of Israel" portion.

 

[bodecea]

What? Where in the world have I EVER said anything like that?


(Knowing that you will never, ever be able to prove your comment....just another slimy lie by Uncensored)

Alright, I'll retract the control portion, you only jumped in on the "Drive em' out of Israel" portion.

BS! Where have I EVER said that?

You just lie and lie and lie, don't you? Getting to the point that no one who isn't a partisan hack believes anything you say anymore.

 

[BlindBoo]

Go ask all those unborn fetus's out there just how great the threat from liberal idiots is to them.

'cause liberals just love wantonely killing innocent life, for no other reason than it poses an inconvience to 'em.

Sick bastards!

Noting the desparate attempt at deflection.

If the subject is: dems trivialize radical islam and many here are bringing up "all those Christian terrorists" (like, 4 in the last 40 years), isn't that "deflection"?

No it was not deflection. You asked for clarification.

 

[BlindBoo]

Would you care to clarify your statement???

There is a greater danger of horrific attack (like a nuclear bomb or flying planes into Nuclear plants, building, or truck bombs) from the Islamic Radicals. The Christian Fundies threat I see as less horrific in nature. (like killing abortion providers).

Thank you, that is much clearer. Would you care to count the numbers of people killed by "Christian Fundies" in comparison to islamic radicals?

And how will that prove or disprove Democrats trivialize the threat from Radical Islam?

 

[Steelplate]

I don't trivialize the threat from radical Islam.... I just don't think all muslims are radical or that the religion itself is a "death religion" or whatever nonsense that people spew.

 

[Uncensored2008]

BS! Where have I EVER said that?

Yawn..

You know these threads stay on the board, doncha?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ant-the-us-to-spend-on-israeli-defense-9.html

You just lie and lie and lie, don't you? Getting to the point that no one who isn't a partisan hack believes anything you say anymore.

ROFL

Irony indeed.

You know bod, if you don't want to get grouped with the Nazis, then hanging with Lasher and Dr. Drock ain't a great idea..

 

[Uncensored2008]

I don't trivialize the threat from radical Islam.... I just don't think all muslims are radical or that the religion itself is a "death religion" or whatever nonsense that people spew.

Then you simply have no knowledge of the religion.

99% of Muslims are relatively harmless.



So were 99% of Nazis.

 

[logical4u]

really?? HOW so?



I did nothing more than you did. You offered yout interpretation of what he said even as you ignored what he actually said. Where as I based my interpretation on what he actually said.
The sad fact is that now you agree with me that you were WRONG when you claimed that he made a comparison because you NOW admit that he didn't even mention radical islam.



So you ARE saying that because he did NOT mention radical islam that he is trivializing the threat of it?? Got it. I knew I had you pegged the first time.

The sad fact is that now you agree with me that you were WRONG when you claimed that he made a comparison because you NOW admit that he didn't even mention radical islam.

First you claimed he was comparing the two religions and then you admit after being called out for being wrong you admit that he didn't make a comparable statement. LOL

Any way that you try to spin it YOU were the one that was proven WRONG based on the shift in your own argument. LOL

I did not state what "he" meant. I said if someone is makes a statement of comparison and doesn't mention the "subject" (of the thread), that person is ignoring or trivializing the subject (in this case it would be .... radical islam). I did not interpret his statement to mean something else; I made an observation.

This is basic reading or communication skills; a person brings up a topic, the other changes the subject, USUALLY means that the person that changed the subject is uncomfortable discussing the topic.

LOL Dude give it up. Your tired attempts to try to change what you meant to say by changing your words AFTER the fact does not change your original statements. Your are now doing the same dishonest crap that you tried earlier when you dishonestly tried to claim that your veiled personal attack was an "invitation" to discuss.

What is even more hilarious is that previously you accused me of spin when I made an "observation" so why doesn't your own standard apply to you??

You said

Spin???? That would be what you did here ... you took a posting and declared the intent of a poster that wasn't you.

but then you follwoed that up by doing the very same thing.

If the thread is about "trivializing the threat of islam" and a poster is focusing on Christianity (opinion or fact) without presenting a comparable statement about islam, it is obvious to most of us here that person is "ignoring" or "trivializing" islam.

By your own words are you not declaring the intent of a poster that wasn't you when you claim that based on your "interpretation/observation" that he was "trivializing" islam??
By your own definition that is spinning.

Your communication skills are showing ...

An invitation for discussion (since it must be clarified for you): How familiar are you about Abraham and his children and grandchildren? Are you aware of Ishmael, Issac who was father to Esau and Jacob? I know you prefer to do the nannny, nanny, boo, boo thing and call names, but here is an invitation for you to use you reasoning skills.

 

[Steelplate]

Actually, I do have a fairly good grasp on the religion, and also of the culture... let me clue you in on something. The Culture of the Middle East has more to do with radicalism than the religion.

 

[beowolfe]

I don't trivialize the threat from radical Islam.... I just don't think all muslims are radical or that the religion itself is a "death religion" or whatever nonsense that people spew.

Then you simply have no knowledge of the religion.

99% of Muslims are relatively harmless.



So were 99% of Nazis.

No. 99% of Nazis were NOT harmless. You obvious don't have a 'working knowledge' of Nazi Germany so you're just making chit up.