Why do Democrats Trivialize The Threat From Radical Islam

[drsmith1072]

Nowhere did she say that it "seems we don't have enough attacks".....Nor did she even come close to implying that........You lied by implying that she even said anything close to it, because she didn't.

Seems like one big circle jerk where nothing was proven.

Oh well, this thread seems to have run its course.

Uh did you read allie's comment??



So how do you explain that comment and how can you HONESTLY claim that what bod said isn't even close to what allie said?? What is your interpretation of what allie was trying to say??

(seems to think we do not have enough attacks)

Seems to me that bod was correct.

Once again, epic fail!

Please show us where Allie claimed she believes we "do not have enough attacks" or, that she "seems to believe we don not have enough attacks.

Nowhere in that quote does she make either claim.

Funny thing is, you're doing the exact same thing Bodey is. Twisting and spinning in the wind, as you accuse others of doing the same thing. Talk about a couple o' god damn hypocrites!

Either put up the evidence, or simply STFU!

This is just too damn easy. Like a walk in the park on a brisk spring day.

WOW you really are that ignorant aren't you?? It's pretty obvious that bod did not quote allie exactly so why pretend that he ever claimsed to have done such?

What bod did do was sum up what allie said by equating

railway/subway/cafe bombings, riots or Jews attacked in the streets!

to the word "attacks" instead of citing the whole comment.

So are you really so ignorant that you cannot see how those "attacks" that allie listed can be summed up with the single word "attacks"?????

Furthermore, what is it with your obsessive need to try and falsely claim that bod was quoting allie's exact words with her responses after the links?? Is that type of dishonesty the only way that you can pretend to ignore the fact that allie did talk about harrassing muslims because she can't "outlaw the religion" as well as the fact that allie did state

We don't have enough railway/subway/cafe bombings, riots or Jews attacked in the streets!

otherwise known as ATTACKS. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

Did anyone ever post my stated intent to harass muslims?

I'd like to see that, please. I certinaly have no recollection of ever saying that, but I'm sure I must have, since the lying loons say I did.

So please post that quote. Thanks.

Yes and here it is AGAIN try not to stumble over it as you run away AGAIN.

And it's psychological. We can't outlaw the religion, but we can sure as shit bring pressure to bear when it comes to the practice of it.

Private empoyers can also put into place policies that tightens screws. No skull caps, no prayer.

Little things like that. It is exactly how the south and Mormons were brought to heel. So I guess the analogy of the South was apt to a degree.

So care to explain how that is not considered harassment??

 

[AllieBaba]

I think you must be mentally ill.

Anyway, it's impossible to argue with a crazy person who doesn't understand the workings of the English language, or have the ability to distinguish fact from fiction. You remind me of the environmental and animal rights wackos...they functioned at exactly the same level. Currently those people are either in jail or very regretful of their blind devotion to a destructive ideology.

Ring any bells for you?

 

[AllieBaba]

Did anyone ever post my stated intent to harass muslims?

I'd like to see that, please. I certinaly have no recollection of ever saying that, but I'm sure I must have, since the lying loons say I did.

So please post that quote. Thanks.

Yes and here it is AGAIN try not to stumble over it as you run away AGAIN.

And it's psychological. We can't outlaw the religion, but we can sure as shit bring pressure to bear when it comes to the practice of it.

Private empoyers can also put into place policies that tightens screws. No skull caps, no prayer.

Little things like that. It is exactly how the south and Mormons were brought to heel. So I guess the analogy of the South was apt to a degree.

So care to explain how that is not considered harassment??

No. I trust you have access to a dictionary. I suggest you use it. I'm sick of your willful ignorance and alternate reality.

 

[drsmith1072]

No, you did not.

Show us ONE thing Allie said that was;

1.) False
2.) She knew to be false
3.) Was posted with intent to deceive


You have NOT done this, nor can you.

The only liar here is you.

So it is the "allie is ignorant" defense. Even IF they admit that bod shows something that allie said is not true, however, unless bod can prove that allie "intended" to decieve then they will claim that she did not lie. LOL

you got to love this bs. She didn't "intend" to lie she is just stupid. LOL

Logical fallacy at it's finest.

Say whatever you like, then have it rephrased as something completely different.

You say "This house is blue."

smith or bod say "There are so enough houses!!!! You are terrible for saying there aren't enough houses! Liar! Liar! Liar!"

You ask for evidence you have ever said there aren't enough houses.

They link to "This house is blue" after two days or so, and say there, that's the proof that you think there aren't enough houses.

It's like crazy land.

How is that a logical fallacy when that is the very argument that u2008 is putting forth?? Please explain HOW it is a logical fallacy if you can?

Oh you mean it's not and this is just more of your usual avoidance.

Thanks for nothing but avoidance as per usual. LOL

 

[AllieBaba]

I already explained it. I'm sorry you don't understand.

 

[drsmith1072]

I'd like to remind you that your claim to me was: "You have defended Islam in general and the specific acts of Islam at every turn."

Prove it.

He won't because he can't and he knows it which is why when i called him out on it he tried to change the subject to how he took drock's comments out of context. LOL

It has been proven to the satisfaction of everybody, except the lying parties.

Based on how you right wingers are the "lying parties" and you are also the ones claiming to be saitsified with a work of fiction that you conintue to fail to substantiate, your statement cannot possible be true.

Nice contradiction on your part though. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

I didn't miss those questions. I actually referenced them and dismissed them. Re-read the thread. Carefully.

So you avoided responding to them? Thanks for the admission coward. How typical that you once again run from the truth that exposes your dishonesty. LOL

 

[AllieBaba]

Whatever.

 

[drsmith1072]

Exactly!

Thanks for agreeing with me that u2008 lied about blindboo. However what does the following spin have to do with what I said??



BTW repeating that lie will not make it true.

Other than that, your post makes absolutely no fucking sense whatever.

So what are you confused by little girl?? Let me know what i need me to spell out so you can follow and I will do my best to help you understand. Just try to be specific and explain what does not make sense and why it doesn't make sense.

Of course if this is just your usual avoidance tactic of claiming that posts do not make sense or are irrelevent so you can avoid facts that counter your spin then please stop running away and try addressing what was actually said.

Your avoidance will not change the FACTS that I have stated.

I drive a Ford!!! But I really like Buicks, too..

More avoidance imagine that. What are you afraid of? What about my questions and comments scares you so much that you run away from them??

What confised you?? I am serious I will take the time and explain it to you so that you can understand what I said. So please provide some specifics on what confused you.

LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

Smith, really, you should stop.

Says you, the hack who is running away from the very facts that you rightwing trolls have been asking for. Now that you got them you can't run away from them fast enough. LOL

Since when does a QUESTION qualify as a LIE, you nincompoop???

You people really don't know what a lie is, do you? That explains a lot.

Your LIE begins when you make unfounded assertions about bod as part of your so called question.

What is the factual basis for your assertion that bod isn't familiar with the bible?

What is the factual basis for your assertiong that bod is criticizing the bible as she answered a question about the bible??

Without those two assertions your so-called "question" is pretty much nonexistent.

So, do you have anything real to support the core assertions of your "question" as you try to use your so-called "question" to personally attack bod and call her names or is it the usual dishonesty as you make shite up and dishonestly attribute it to someone so you can attack them for something that didn't say?

So care to explain?

LOL!

So...I'm a liar because my question lead you to think that Bod is a liar...but you think that's a lie, so my question is obviously a lie?

WOW! That is no where near to what I actaully said so either you lack the ability to comprehend what you read or you can understand just fine and would rather LIE about what someone said so you can attack them for something that you made up? So which is it??

No matter how much you blather around it, my QUESTION made absolutely NO assertion.

Actually it made TWO. One that bod is not familiar with the bible, even as she answers questions about the bible, and the other is that bod was criticizing the bible. Those two assertions are the core of your "question."

It was a QUESTION (which I don't think was ever answered).

How do you honestly expect a poster to answer a question that is based on made up assertions meant to attack the credibility of that poster when they never made any such claims??

All the rest is obfuscation on your part. I asked a question. A question isn't a lie. Where is the lie in asking someone a question (that they don't answer)? What assertion is made? Where is the deception?

A "question" based on false assertions that were intentionally and falsely attributed to the person being questioned for the purpose of insulting and attacking them IS dishonest.
Now unless you can show that bod actually made those assertions that you attribute to her it's pretty obvious that you made them up.

So again I ask,

"What is the factual basis for your assertion that bod isn't familiar with the bible?

What is the factual basis for your assertiong that bod is criticizing the bible as she answered a question about the bible??

Without those two assertions your so-called "question" is pretty much nonexistent.

So, do you have anything real to support the core assertions of your "question" as you try to use your so-called "question" to personally attack bod and call her names or is it the usual dishonesty as you make shite up and dishonestly attribute it to someone so you can attack them for something that didn't say?"

So care to answer the questions or are you going to run away and pretend this never happened, AGAIN??

 

[AllieBaba]

You've already said all that.

 

[logical4u]

So the fact that he doesn't mention radical islam at all somehow proves that democrats trivialize the threat from radical islam?? REALLY??? Are you sure about that?? LOL

WOW!

The fact that he is concentrating on "rightwing Christian fanatics", while IGNORING radical islam demonstrates how "democrats trivialize the threat from radical islam". Pile up all the numbers from Timothy Mcveigh (not a Christian) and Eric Rudolph; take that number and compare it to the murders, tortures, maiming, and rapes that were "documented" over the same time period. Yes, that is how "democrats trivialize the threat from radical islam".

In other words you've got nothing but your own misinterpretation as you make shite up as you go along. Got it.

FACT is that nowhere in their post as they present their opinion about christianity do they mention radical islam or trivialize it, so for you to insert your misinterpretation and try to claim that it was the posters intent when no such evidence exists to support such an assumption makes you look pretty ridiculous.

If you are comparing two religions, and you only focus on one of those religions, isn't that "ignoring" or "trivializing" the other religion?

 

[drsmith1072]

LOL!

So...I'm a liar because my question lead you to think that Bod is a liar...but you think that's a lie, so my question is obviously a lie?

WOW! That is no where near to what I actaully said so either you lack the ability to comprehend what you read or you can understand just fine and would rather LIE about what someone said so you can attack them for something that you made up? So which is it??



Actually it made TWO. One that bod is not familiar with the bible, even as she answers questions about the bible, and the other is that bod was criticizing the bible. Those two assertions are the core of your "question."



How do you honestly expect a poster to answer a question that is based on made up assertions meant to attack the credibility of that poster when they never made any such claims??

All the rest is obfuscation on your part. I asked a question. A question isn't a lie. Where is the lie in asking someone a question (that they don't answer)? What assertion is made? Where is the deception?

A "question" based on false assertions that were intentionally and falsely attributed to the person being questioned for the purpose of insulting and attacking them IS dishonest.
Now unless you can show that bod actually made those assertions that you attribute to her it's pretty obvious that you made them up.

So again I ask,

"What is the factual basis for your assertion that bod isn't familiar with the bible?

What is the factual basis for your assertiong that bod is criticizing the bible as she answered a question about the bible??

Without those two assertions your so-called "question" is pretty much nonexistent.

So, do you have anything real to support the core assertions of your "question" as you try to use your so-called "question" to personally attack bod and call her names or is it the usual dishonesty as you make shite up and dishonestly attribute it to someone so you can attack them for something that didn't say?"

So care to answer the questions or are you going to run away and pretend this never happened, AGAIN??

"or is it the usual dishonesty as you make shit (shite) up and dishonestly attribute it to someone so you can attack them for something they (that) didn't say?"

(above quote edited for lousy spelling that was noted)

WOW going to the fallback position of attacking me for spelling errors shows that even you know that you've got NOTHING. LOL The fact that you failed to address anything that I actually said further proves that you've got NOTHING.

Isn't that exactly what Bodey did to Allie in her ridiculous #2011?

Why yes it is.

Really?? HOW is it "exactly what bodey did to allie" and furthermore, how does that change the fact that you are attacking for "bodey" by accusing him of the very same thing that you are giving allie a pass for.

Thanks for admitting you are a HYPOCRITE. LOL

Damn, you just keep stepping on that lil' needledick oof yours, over and over again.

Hypocrisy is a funny thing, indeed!

Says you, the troll who tried to attack bod while giving allie a pass for ding what you now call the very same thing. LOL

BTW I am not saying that bod did "exactly" the same thing. That is still left for you to prove.
However, it is telling that you try to attack me for excusing bod over your unproven accusation when you state that allie is doing exactly the same and yet I don't see you calling out allie for what you have called LYING. Why is that??

Since your claim is that bod and allie are doing "exactly" the same thing then based on how you are called bod a liar for doing it, doesn't that make allie a liar too??

Thanks for putting your foot in your mouth AGAIN. LOL

 

[AllieBaba]

There are two trolls supreme on this thread; they are you and Bod.

Since you made your appearance, the thread has disintegrated into a mishmash of constantly changing assertions, made by you and Bod, that cannot (and have not been) proven. It started with you crowing that I and UC had lied and flip flopped. It progressed to you throwing lie after lie out, and when those lies were exposed as lies, either you or bod would change the original assertion. And weaved among all the other bs are the two astonishingly enormous compilation of a links to my posts that prove nothing except that Bod has apparently read every single comment I've ever made and has nothing better to do than flood the thread with them.

Now it's over. You didn't make any of your points, you haven't proven that anyone's a liar, you have been exposed as liars yourself. So now you want to start over again. Fuck off. You aren't reasonable, and you're a liar besides. This thread is done.

 

[drsmith1072]

You're such a fuckin' Jackwagon.

I could give a damn what Hannity said about being cleared. I provided a source after you FALSELY claimed those two were cleared, that clearly showed they were NOT cleared. You just can't stand the fact that your lie about them being cleared was just that, a fucking lie.

And yes, Lib's in Berkeley DID invite those two goat herders to come live with them, and then put it for vote.....There is no way of getting around that fact......That stupid liberal in the Hannity video was out inviting like the liberal idiot she is, long before she was interviewed on Hannity.

Fact is, when one claims a desire to invite, and then puts out said invite, that is a fucking invite.....You just don't want to admit it that it was done by your fellow loony liberal idiots!

Can't say I blame you. I'd be embarrasses too. After all, it's your fellow liberals who continually engage in crazy shit like that.

LMAO!

LOL So I quoted your original source, the hannity clip, and you are trying to attack me for using your source that you are now dismissing even as you stand behind the original claims that you made based on that source??

OMG that is just hilarious.

BTW I see you still can't prove your claim that those two gitmo detainees were still invited even after the resolution to invite them failed to pass so why is it that you appear to believe that repeating the same BS over and over again makes it true??

Where is your substance to back up your claims?? You are going after bod to provide absolute proof that allie lied and yet you refuse to hold yourself to that same standard. Why is that??

Show me where i'm lying, dufus........That stupid lib put out an invite during the interview. That stupid lib helped put an invite up for vote......Meaning, your fellow liberal idiots in Berkeley did put out an invite to gitmo detainees.........You can't refute that. It's absolutely true!

Are you going to say that your fellow liberal idiot in that video isn't liberal?

LMAO!

Now, where's your proof of an Allie lie.

So far, the only lies we are seeing, are coming from you and Bodey. You two have lied in claiming that Allie lied. Not one shred of evidence has been presented, meaning you two are lying!

We're still waiting!

It's YOUR claim so where is YOUR proof?? Once again a rightwinger fails to prove his own arguments and even after demanding that others prove theirs this hack is demanding that I disprove his arguments. LOL Thanks for the blatant hypocrisy.

You keep repeating it over and over again and yet you have failed to provide anything other than your repeated OPINIONS.

ONCE AGAIN, where is your substance to back up your claims?? You are going after bod to provide absolute proof that allie lied and yet you refuse to hold yourself to that same standard. Why is that??

 

[logical4u]

Why would you brand all muslims over the actions of a few? Maybe if Reagan hadn't turned his back on Bin Laden after arming him he wouldn't keep attacking us. how would you feel if Iran set up military bases in the middle of the US and kept troops here like we do in the middle east. Or if the middle east took texas and made it a state like with did Isreal?

Are there Radical Muslims yes but there is just as much crime commited by others every day, people are murdered on the Streets of America alll the time, 100's (maybe 1000's) of priests raped little children should we hold hearings about these christian terrorists who ruined the lives of families?

Just imagine how little violance we would have in the world if it wasn't for religion..

Catholic priests have been arrested and brought to trial for child molestation (rightly so in cases where they were guilty!).

Where communism replaced religion, the deaths were in the millions in a few decades. FYI.

How did islam get the ME? Did they purchase it? Did people vote in Shariah as a new system of GOVERNMENT?

Why did the USA ever go to the ME? Was it for "trade"?

 

[drsmith1072]

Ok, so it's about radical islam in the op.

Disregard.

So this is how you admit that you were WRONG when you called someone else dishonest??

You deny the threat from ISLAM all the time, Bod.

BTW, it's dishonest to add that "radical" in there. I never said anybody denied there was a threat from RADICAL Islam. I said you trivialize the threat from Islam (per the OP) when you deny the threat exists.

Are you saying now you acknowledge the threat of Islam?

So you called Bod dishonest and despite the fact that YOU were WRONG, this bs sidestep is all that you have to offer?? LOL

So was that a lie on your part or were just ignorant and didn't "intend" to misrepresent the facts??

Thanks for showing an example of how what you called a "logical fallacy" actually applies. LOL

 

[logical4u]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErzxOz3Dzv8&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - Shariamerica: Islam, Obama, and the Establishment Clause[/ame]

Dems elevating islam above Christianity.

 

[logical4u]

Yet, you are the one that can't do a control F or search an online book for "Abraham".

I am proving you would rather stand on the sideline and "jeer" than actually get some facts.

You claim that you have read the Bible but will not enter into a conversation about your 'knowledge'. You are one sharp tack, NOT.

Hey moron, you already had someone else jump through several of your hoops and answering your questions and you still haven't gotten to your point. Wouldn't it have been so much easier IF you had just presented substance to support your claims instead of making this long and drawn out game that seems to have no end?

I know that you are desperate to make this about me since it was you who failed to provide anything of substance to supprot your claims but come on, even you hve to be more honest than to try that lame bate a switch?

They are your arguments, you prove them. I am not going to waste my time searching for something that you should provide.

Yet, you are the one that can't do a control F or search an online book for "Abraham".

I am proving you would rather stand on the sideline and "jeer" than actually get some facts.

You claim that you have read the Bible but will not enter into a conversation about your 'knowledge'. You are one sharp tack, NOT.


To have a "knowledgeable conversation, you have to agree to what is "known".

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?
You did not respond. I don't know if you didn't pay attention to this part of the Bible, or if you do not want a conversation about the differences between islamic teachings and the Bible, or if you are just to into the child like behavior of "liar, liar", "nanny, nanny, boo, boo, etc. I have been patient and await a demonstration of your comprehension for this part of the Bible.