Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bomb explosion in New York.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • slick_miester
    replied
    Originally posted by Pruitt View Post
    Actually I have watched my biases as an adult. I have known many minorities and a few Muslims over the years. I treated them all as individuals. I think this definitely places me in the minority here in the South. There are many contradictions in what other regions perceive of the South.
    Just to set the record straight, there are no shortage of crass and nasty bigots north of the Mason-Dixon line, as well. Lord knows we have plenty, enough to spare.

    What made the Southern experience . . . . unique was the fact that the racism was codified, institutionalized, and then regularly acted upon, with extreme violence. The kind of violence seen in the Emmett Till and Birmingham's 16th Street Church cases was tolerated up North not because Northerners were incapable of such violence, but only because they were intolerant of it: they didn't have the stomach for it, especially in their own towns. Down South, even those who weren't dyed-in-the-wool racists tolerated it.

    After listening to some of the anti-Muslim screeds here, I fear that I'm hearing a call to return to something akin to Jim Crow. After a couple of street crimes against elderly Bangladeshis up here recently, I know full well of what my neighbors are capable. Thankfully the police arrested the perps right away. Were it up to the Trump crowd, the perps would give interviews after their acquittal, like Emmett Till's murderers.

    As far as I'm concerned, the murderers of the Bangladeshis here, and the murderers of Emmett Till down there, are every bit the terrorists that al Qaeda and ISIS are. Their motives are little more than pretext. It's their violence that's real: it's the true fruit by which they are known. (Matthew 7:20)

    Leave a comment:


  • Gixxer86g
    replied
    Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post

    Best post in the thread, but you forgot to add a or risk being taken perfectly seriously by the Left.
    Too late. Just look at JJ's mind numbing post that immediately followed yours.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gixxer86g
    replied
    Originally posted by ChrisF1987 View Post
    I don't think it's racism per se, rather many people are just frightened of the unknown, and of things that are not familiar to them. Many people 'over yonder', well ... they live in very homogeneous small towns and they don't have much if any contact with ethnic minorities so all they know about Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, etc is what they see on the internet.

    This resentment is natural, eventually we'll all learn to live side by side in peace. How long will it take? Who knows, but I am confident of it. I think we as a society has made enormous strides since the Civil Rights movement and we can only go forward from here.
    Frightened of the unknown? Seriously?

    And you think I live "over yonder"?

    It seems it's you that lives in the insulated world. Guess what, Star Trek is just a TV show. We don't love each other and we won't anytime soon.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gixxer86g
    replied
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
    I get what you're saying: Irish terrorists = good, Muslim terrorist = bad. Guess the differentiation is in their melanin content.
    Not at all. Terrorists are terrorists. It's just your comparison that fails. It has nothing to do with the political ideology of islam. And you do realize that muslims come in every color, don't you?

    And you've not answered my question: why the condemnation for Muslims when the same acts from Irishmen merit nary a comment from you? Shall I guess?
    Are the Irish at war with everyone who isn't them? Does Irish terrorism plague the world?

    It's 2016, not the troubles. Same goes with your bringing the Chinese into this discussion of current events. You're way off topic.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gixxer86g
    replied
    Originally posted by sebfrench76 View Post
    Me?
    By writing daft posts on a forum?
    Frenchie power rocks man !
    And btw,your lessons in life coming from a citizen whose frontiers are on my country , are much appreciated .
    Sleep well senor while we are trying to deal with the 10 000 migrants who want to invade your Holly soil.
    It's your problem to deal with, Seb. You let them in....

    Leave a comment:


  • sebfrench76
    replied
    Originally posted by Escape2Victory View Post
    . Because the multiculturalist is failing in this responsibility, you are now spawning far right movements across the West. .
    Me?
    By writing daft posts on a forum?
    Frenchie power rocks man !
    And btw,your lessons in life coming from a citizen whose frontiers are on my country , are much appreciated .
    Sleep well senor while we are trying to deal with the 10 000 migrants who want to invade your Holly soil.

    Leave a comment:


  • Salinator
    replied
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
    Then why were they excluded?
    Um..........it was because they worked for low wages and did jobs Americans did not want to do. Nothing racist there. Racism came later in the form of Emergency Quota Act of 1921 and Immigration Act of 1924.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trung Si
    replied
    I just whish that we could stay on topic her on ACG and not go in to the weeds on every thread, but I think it's too much to ask for.

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    Here is an example of why one needs to distinguish the nuances of Dogma and Scripture when dealing with religions, or ideologies in general, with or without "deities" attached.

    There is a Catch 22 here in that what was said to Muhammad by Allah can't be changed and the last of the revelations is very anti non-Muslim. The Koran is not arranged in order of revelation, but roughly longest to shortest of the chapters/Surah. Any later revelation that contradicts an earlier one is the one that was to apply, abrogation. Here's a link to the chronological order of the Koran;
    http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Chronologi...f_the_Qur%27an

    Some of the relating passages of the Koran, addressing the mandate of (physical)Jihad(Holy War) and rewards for engaging in such, etc.;

    [2.154] And do not speak of those who are slain in Allah's way as dead; nay, (they are) alive, but you do not perceive.
    [2.216] Fighting is enjoined on you, and h is an object of dislike to you; and it may be that you dislike a thing while it is good for you, and it may be that you love a thing while it is evil for you, and Allah knows, while you do not know.
    [4.74] Therefore let those fight in the way of Allah, who sell this world's life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward.
    [4.76] Those who believe fight in the way of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the way of the Shaitan. Fight therefore against the friends of the Shaitan; surely the strategy of the Shaitan is weak.
    [4.89] They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.
    [5.32] For this reason did We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our apostles came to them with clear arguments, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.
    [5.33] The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement,
    [8.38] Say to those who disbelieve, if they desist, that which is past shall be forgiven to them; and if they return, then what happened to the ancients has already passed.
    [8.39] And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah; but if they desist, then surely Allah sees what they do.
    [8.60] And prepare against them what force you can and horses tied at the frontier, to frighten thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them, whom you do not know (but) Allah knows them; and whatever thing you will spend in Allah's way, it will be paid back to you fully and you shall not be dealt with unjustly.
    [9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.
    [9.36] Surely the number of months with Allah is twelve months in Allah's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being sacred; that is the right reckoning; therefore be not unjust to yourselves regarding them, and fight the polytheists all together as they fight you all together; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).
    [33.26] And He drove down those of the followers of the Book who backed them from their fortresses and He cast awe into their hearts; some you killed and you took captive another part.
    [33.27] And He made you heirs to their land and their dwellings and their property, and (to) a land which you have not yet trodden, and Allah has power over all things.
    [47.4] So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.
    [47.5] He will guide them and improve their condition.
    [47.6] And cause them to enter the garden which He has made known to them.
    http://quod.lib.umich.edu/k/koran/browse.html

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    I favor a more selective questioning process for future Muslim immigrants. Terrorism is a tactic/technique, a method of violence. The term is mistakenly applied to cover those whom use terrorism as a method to achieve their linked political-religious agenda; Islamic Jihad. So we should find ways to separate them from those whom are "Muslim", but might really be MINOs and/or wanting to come to the West to get away from the extremes of the fundamentalist Muslims and their Sharia based Islamic societies.

    [Finding Moderate Muslims:] Do you believe in modernity?
    http://www.danielpipes.org/1322/find...e-in-modernity

    Finding Moderate Muslims - More Questions
    http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005...more-questions

    More cost effective to "treat" refugees abroad, not haul them here. We should only bring over those whom would rather provide allegiance to our nation and it's laws and principles rather than their religion, who fully understand and embrace what it will mean to become a citizen in the future.

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
    Then why were they excluded?



    I live within walking distance of many thousands of Muslims, from a wide variety of countries. The overwhelming majority of them do nothing more offensive than bad driving and BO. Some minute share of Muslims commit acts of terror. That's a fact. It's also a fact that they represent only a tiny share of Muslims as a whole. Just like all Canadians are not hockey players, not all Muslims are terrorists. Indeed, some are fighting the terrorists tooth and nail. So before we hit the panic button and start excluding Muslims the way we did Chinese, I'd think it would behoove us to try to find out who our allies are, who our enemies are, and how to undermine those who'd seek to do us harm, while not hampering those who just want to lead normal lives.

    The operative word here should not be Muslim, but terrorist. Somehow, however, after listening to all the Archie Bunkers here, I'm led to believe that injuring Muslims is more important, and more desirable, than effectively combating and hampering terrorists. Say what you want about Muslim, but terrorist is decidedly a matter of choice, and a matter of action. Those actually involved with crime and violence should be far higher priorities than some schmuck dressed like a tent.

    Unless, of course, you're suggesting that dressing like a tent should now be classified as a crime.
    Do you think it possible to be anti-Islam (Dogma and Scriptures) without being anti-Muslim?

    I ask because it seems many confuse this distinction and think once someone is opposed to Islam the Theology, Dogma and Scripture, they are opposed to ALL Muslims. Many Muslims here in the West tend to be MINOs (Muslim In Name Only), but still they and others retain enough of their religion and culture to be in conflict with the foundations of our secular nation. Consider this excerpt and the linked article;
    ...
    Instead, Mr. Khan insisted: "One of the lessons from around the world is that a laissez-faire or hands-off approach to social integration doesn't work. We need rules, institutions, and support to enable people to integrate into cohesive communities and for the avoidance of doubt, I don't mean assimilation, I mean integration, and there's a difference."

    He added: "People shouldn't have to drop their cultures and traditions when they arrive in our cities and countries."

    The United Kingdom, and especially areas of East London which overwhelmingly voted for Mr. Khan, is currently suffering from Muslim ghettoisation, horrific employment rates for Muslim women, an internal debate surrounding the banning of the burka, and ongoing issues such as female genital mutilation, anti-Semitism, and homophobia within Muslim communities.

    Under Mr. Khan's plans, none of these "cultures and traditions" would need to be dropped for Muslim migrants to Western countries.
    ....
    http://www.meforum.org/blog/2016/09/...dnt-assimilate

    I'm breaking this out into a couple of posts ...

    Leave a comment:


  • Stonewall_Jack
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Or not. It's only the mass of refugees that we're concerned about. You offer another red herring argument here.
    Its a vital fact that negates the view Syrians are not doing anything about their homelands. Note how some folks in this debate view Syrians as worthless, lazy. What I present shows the Syrian people to very much care about their lands. We have taken in many refugees from Africa and the Middle East...we can handle a few thousand refugees from Syria.

    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    The Torah doesn't preclude a non-Jewish government, a secular government, nor does it conflict with most modern legal systems in general. Instead, it is an add on that practicing Jews follow in addition to the laws of a nation.
    A sort of praise for Jews but not Muslims?

    Thats ok, but it opens the door for folks to criticize Jews and Torah Law but praise Muslims and Sharia. My approach is clearly a healthy and true approach.... which is that both Torah and Sharia when practiced correctly treat all people equally.

    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Sharia is different. It imposes a Islamic based set of laws on the land and government. Even then, it doesn't treat everyone equally. Non-Muslim and Muslim are treated differently. Men and women get radically different treatment too. It replaces modern systems of law with one based solely on religious principles.

    Some examples:

    • Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
    • Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.
    • Criticizing or denying Allah, the god of Islam is punishable by death.
    • A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death.
    • A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
    • A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
    • A man can marry an infant girl and consummate the marriage when she is 9 years old.
    • Girls' clitoris should be cut (Muhammad's words, Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).
    • A woman can have 1 husband, who can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.
    • A man can beat his wife for insubordination.
    • A man can unilaterally divorce his wife; a woman needs her husband's consent to divorce.
    • A divorced wife loses custody of all children over 6 years of age or when they exceed it.
    • Testimonies of four male witnesses are required to prove rape against a woman.
    • A woman who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
    • A woman's testimony in court, allowed in property cases, carries ½ the weight of a man's.
    • A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits.
    • A woman cannot drive a car, as it leads to fitnah (upheaval).
    • A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.
    • Meat to eat must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah - i.e., be "Halal".
    • Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam.
    The same arguments are made against Jews, here they are,

    http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False..._child_sex.htm

    its the same type of hype that sites like the following use,

    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

    TAG note the pictures and just the hype that those sites try and stir.


    Because of the fact that Jews fought alongside Muhammad and early Muslims, and that Atheists lived in early Muslim lands as equals negates any sort of view that a proper Islamic society mistreats non Muslims.



    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    The problem here is that Jewish law and Catholic canon don't conflict with secular sets of laws whereas Sharia is in stark contrast, and often criminally in conflict with, secular Western law sets.
    Practicing Sharia in the West to the full extent of the rules will land whoever does it in prison in pretty short order, particularly with regard to treatment of women.



    But, they too wouldn't have stood for imposition of Sharia on Americans, not for a minute. Sure, they'd say "Practice Islam all you like, but the second you kill a non-Muslim under Sharia for something like getting a Muslim friend to convert to to Christianity you're going to hang for it."

    Sharia is completely incompatible with the modern world. It's a brutal set of 14th Century rules that should be burned to the last copy. It has no more place in the world today than readopting the Aztec or Mayan legal system.
    In the USA, there can never be any Sharia, Torah or Canon Law. Jews Christians and Muslims who argue for that are arguing for something that is impossible to put into law. So before anyone even brings up religious laws...it would take a group to take over the USA to actually have religious laws here in the USA. I like the current system of law in the USA...but lets also remember that not all democracies are perfect, and not all Theocracies have been bad places to live.

    Leave a comment:


  • Combat Engineer
    replied
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
    Then why were they excluded?



    I live within walking distance of many thousands of Muslims, from a wide variety of countries. The overwhelming majority of them do nothing more offensive than bad driving and BO. Some minute share of Muslims commit acts of terror. That's a fact. It's also a fact that they represent only a tiny share of Muslims as a whole. Just like all Canadians are not hockey players, not all Muslims are terrorists. Indeed, some are fighting the terrorists tooth and nail. So before we hit the panic button and start excluding Muslims the way we did Chinese, I'd think it would behoove us to try to find out who our allies are, who our enemies are, and how to undermine those who'd seek to do us harm, while not hampering those who just want to lead normal lives.

    The operative word here should not be Muslim, but terrorist. Somehow, however, after listening to all the Archie Bunkers here, I'm led to believe that injuring Muslims is more important, and more desirable, than effectively combating and hampering terrorists. Say what you want about Muslim, but terrorist is decidedly a matter of choice, and a matter of action. Those actually involved with crime and violence should be far higher priorities than some schmuck dressed like a tent.

    Unless, of course, you're suggesting that dressing like a tent should now be classified as a crime.
    Their goal is not to attack terrorist, it's to attack liberals and the other real bad guys. Much more important. The word 'effective' is alien to them.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
    QUOTE:
    ...

    All in all, Muslim terrorists had a busy Saturday.

    Naturally, the media rushed to target the real danger to Americans: Donald Trump.

    Half an hour after the Chelsea bombing, Trump stated, in typically vague militaristic language, that a bomb had gone off in New York City, and that America needed to get “very tough.” This prompted apoplexy from members of the media, who deemed it unthinkable that Trump could label the incident a “bombing” without full confirmation. Hillary Clinton, too, attempted to scold Trump for his premature articulation: “It’s important to know the facts about any incidents like this. I think it’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions.” Of course, Clinton and her media allies conveniently ignored the fact that Trump turned out to be right.

    And that was only their first line of attack.

    Next came the inevitable attempts to paint Trump as the source of the attacks.
    ...
    http://www.dailywire.com/news/9299/s...aign=position7
    The difference is not so much left right but lawyers versus normal people. A lawyer will always hesitate to "rush to justice." Why? Because stalling in the legal system is always a good idea. Never taking a chance or risk is how lawyers try to operate. They want to know all the answers before anyone asks a single question.

    It is a sure recipe for gridlock and inaction. It is the antithesis of how businesses and the military operate (or should operate). In these arenas hesitation and indecision are sure losers to taking some reasonable and calculated risks and moving ahead to win or make a profit.

    One more reason Hillary is wrong for America... She's a liar and a lawyer.

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    QUOTE:
    ...

    All in all, Muslim terrorists had a busy Saturday.

    Naturally, the media rushed to target the real danger to Americans: Donald Trump.

    Half an hour after the Chelsea bombing, Trump stated, in typically vague militaristic language, that a bomb had gone off in New York City, and that America needed to get “very tough.” This prompted apoplexy from members of the media, who deemed it unthinkable that Trump could label the incident a “bombing” without full confirmation. Hillary Clinton, too, attempted to scold Trump for his premature articulation: “It’s important to know the facts about any incidents like this. I think it’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions.” Of course, Clinton and her media allies conveniently ignored the fact that Trump turned out to be right.

    And that was only their first line of attack.

    Next came the inevitable attempts to paint Trump as the source of the attacks.
    ...
    http://www.dailywire.com/news/9299/s...aign=position7

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X