Nutjobs Ranting About Politics.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
http://larouchein2004.net/

Is your apology gonna be on the Board, in an IM, or a PM?

He isn't accepted as a Democrat by the party leadership. For that matter, I don't know of anyone who doesn't think he's an insane paranoid lunatic.

If you think that a link to his website is proof that he's anything but a whackadoo, I was wrong. You have stepped off the edge of the curb.

[Diane_Keaton]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Diane said that all Muslims should apologize for the acts of some Islamic terrorists, as though all Muslims bore responsibility for the actions of the Chechen terrorists. She supported her post with a picture of a child that appeared to be dead. I presume the child's picture was there to prove that all Muslims are baby-killers. Given the text of her post, it could have served no other purpose.

Before you work yourself into a lather any more, my posts made clear that no apologies were being requested or expected. Believing dialogue among Muslims is crucial, as is an outright condemnation of the use of terror tactics, is a fairly mainstream thought. And nowhere did I say or imply the child in the picture was dead; in fact, I made a comment about him in the present tense. The photo was a reuters I believe and I assumed plenty might have already seen the photo. Unless you are confusing me with a certain other poster on this board (and if so, tsk tsk) then you are either drunk or in a blindingly pissy mood, either of which repulses me.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
the murderers are 2/3 from a muslim part of Russia that wants to break away.

In 1988 you would have called them freedom fighters and shipped them SAMs.

And once that shit starts, do you really think the bulk of the American public will look at the world your way?

Thank you for explaining the methodology behind the GOP platform. I, for my part, neither begin nor end my day by aligning myself with what the "bulk" of the American people would do. Have you seen some of the other things they do?

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by taxwonk
He isn't accepted as a Democrat by the party leadership. For that matter, I don't know of anyone who doesn't think he's an insane paranoid lunatic.

Hmm. Calls himself a Dem; not accepted by the party leadership; generally regarded as insane paranoid lunatic.

Isn't the question we should be asking: Why wasn't he invited to speak at the GOP convention?

[SlaveNoMore]

taxwonk
He isn't accepted as a Democrat by the party leadership. For that matter, I don't know of anyone who doesn't think he's an insane paranoid lunatic.

If you think that a link to his website is proof that he's anything but a whackadoo, I was wrong. You have stepped off the edge of the curb.

Buchanan isn't accepted by the GOP party leadership. Since his populist, isolationist turn in 1996, he's considered by the party to be nothing more than a sometimes-clever TV pundit, and otherwise an insane paranoid lunatic.

From my view - on the edge of the curb - you're standing on the yellow line, with rush hour traffic bearing down on you from both sides

[SlaveNoMore]

Atticus Grinch
Hmm. Calls himself a Dem; not accepted by the party leadership; generally regarded as insane paranoid lunatic.

Isn't the question we should be asking: Why wasn't he invited to speak at the GOP convention?

Bush lied, People Died!!!!*

* and then he took an 11 point lead

[pony_trekker]

Originally posted by taxwonk
He didn't change the subject. he stayed right on point. You were taking a passage from an ancient text out of context, applying it literally when it should be understood in a historical and allegorical framework, in order to condemn a large portion of the world's population.

Atticus did exactly the same thing.

Is the thing you oblect to the fact that it uses exactly the same argument that you did to show you how ill-considered your position is?

You didn't follow the argument. Let me dumb it down.

Point 1. Ismam is bad for women. Currently.
Question by AG? Where did you read that ?
Response: Koran.
AG: Well the bible says bad things about a lot of things (that aren't currently practiced)

[pony_trekker]

Originally posted by taxwonk
How about my gastroenterologist? Or the cab driver who took me to the train station? Or Zogby?

Exactly. Those are the people who should be made to feel fear and pain, through whatever means, including boycott. Then maybe they rat out their fellow rat or go back.

But I think a well placed nuke here would be better:

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Hmm. Calls himself a Dem; not accepted by the party leadership; generally regarded as insane paranoid lunatic.

Isn't the question we should be asking: Why wasn't he invited to speak at the GOP convention?

Why do keep trying to insult all Republicans for the actions of a few?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Buchanan isn't accepted by the GOP party leadership. Since his populist, isolationist turn in 1996, he's considered by the party to be nothing more than a sometimes-clever TV pundit, and otherwise an insane paranoid lunatic.

From my view - on the edge of the curb - you're standing on the yellow line, with rush hour traffic bearing down on you from both sides

So, then, are you saying that LaRouche isn't really a Democrat and therefore shouldn't have been invited to speak at the Democratic Convention, or are you saying that the party leadership on both sides should provide a platform for the lunatic fringe?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Diane_Keaton

Before you work yourself into a lather any more, my posts made clear that no apologies were being requested or expected. Believing dialogue among Muslims is crucial, as is an outright condemnation of the use of terror tactics, is a fairly mainstream thought.

Oh. So then all you're really saying is that unless the Muslims condemn the violence of a few terrorists, they may as well be terrorists? And it must be true because a whole bunch of yahoos believe it to be true.

Let's look back at your original post.

Jeez. I sure wouldn't want to upset any Muslims by asking them to even ADDRESS mass killings done in the name of their religion, or by fellow Muslims. How is asking this akin to demanding money/reparations? Or even an "apology"? Not even close.



A Russian boy experiences the peaceful tactics of a peaceful people.

That's funny, it sure looks like you're suggesting some sort of group atonement is necessary. Or am I not reading your sarcasm correctly?

[Gattigap]

If your wife starts getting fliers about joining this, burn them quickly.

[spree: Author's wife joins SBVT]

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Not Me
Of course I could do it because what I say is true. If you had ever bothered to read the book you would know it, too. Am I going to do it? No. Go read the book yourself if you want to know what it says.

You misunderstand. It's not that I don't believe there's no nonsense in the Koran.

It's that I don't believe you've ever bothered to read the damn thing, and that this fact slows your advance to red-faced rage about it not a whit.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
What we've done about abu prison as a nation is to publicly assure it cannot happen again. the gov't is putting people in prison for goodness sakes.

Meanwhile the world's 3rd strongest military is getting ready to go medievil on its islamic population. abu prison doesn't lead to a race war. Russia seems to be headed for one. I don't want us to be.

Quick question: abandon Israel or nuke Tehran- pick one.

I'm sorry. You seem to be defending people who suggest that if we aren't already involved in a rac war we ught to be. If my impression is incorrect, then it must be because I'm reading your posts instead of your mind.

As to your quick question. What the fuck?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by pony_trekker
You didn't follow the argument. Let me dumb it down.

Point 1. Ismam is bad for women. Currently.
Question by AG? Where did you read that ?
Response: Koran.
AG: Well the bible says bad things about a lot of things (that aren't currently practiced)

Okay. Now let me dumb down my post.

Point 1. You're a fucking bigot. You can't take an ancient text, pull a phrase or two out of context, and use those phrases to condemn an entire group that happens to make up the bulk of the world's population. You tried to do that.

Response. Atticus did the same thing with the Bible to point out how absurd you were being.

Your counter. You had none. So you tried to misdirect by accusing Atticus of changing the subject.

My Post. See point 1.