RE: Islamophobia in America

RE: Islamophobia in America (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

joether -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/23/2010 9:58:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan The rest of what you wrote approaches drivel. What are you wanting times for? Me to explain what it means to be American? Lol, mostly what I think it means to be American is that life works best when people mind their own business. But you're down 70/30 in this debate. Since I will be working onsite next week, just walk outside and frame your discussion with 10 different people when it comes to islam, mosques, and ground zero. Considering the tripe you spew and the hatred you evidence, the percentage that interests me is how many chase you around the block a few times. I was willing to debate an issue with you, StrangerThan, but this (the boldface), crosses a line. Your willing to use the fear of violence towards another fellow American, to get what you want: To win the arguement. Well, you won. In so doing so, you allowed the Terrorists on 9/11/2001, to win. I hope it was worth it..... If I made you that angry and upset, to conduct that course of action (or even think it).....I'm sorry. Honestly, I am. We agree, quite honestly on alot of things; Maybe with time, we both can sit down together, share a pair of beers, and talk it over calmly and rationally. I'd really like to do that, instead, StrangerThan. You follow through on your threat, it will be very hard to forgive you. I hope you think on that, and have a safe trip in NYC.

StrangerThan -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 4:39:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan The rest of what you wrote approaches drivel. What are you wanting times for? Me to explain what it means to be American? Lol, mostly what I think it means to be American is that life works best when people mind their own business. But you're down 70/30 in this debate. Since I will be working onsite next week, just walk outside and frame your discussion with 10 different people when it comes to islam, mosques, and ground zero. Considering the tripe you spew and the hatred you evidence, the percentage that interests me is how many chase you around the block a few times. I was willing to debate an issue with you, StrangerThan, but this (the boldface), crosses a line. Your willing to use the fear of violence towards another fellow American, to get what you want: To win the arguement. Well, you won. In so doing so, you allowed the Terrorists on 9/11/2001, to win. I hope it was worth it..... If I made you that angry and upset, to conduct that course of action (or even think it).....I'm sorry. Honestly, I am. We agree, quite honestly on alot of things; Maybe with time, we both can sit down together, share a pair of beers, and talk it over calmly and rationally. I'd really like to do that, instead, StrangerThan. You follow through on your threat, it will be very hard to forgive you. I hope you think on that, and have a safe trip in NYC. I think there's a great deal of paranoia involved when someone would find a threat in those words. But since you did, I'll apologize and state rather emphatically that there is no intent to personally chase you around the block. lol My interest is quite accurately stated, I do believe, that being when one spouts as much hatred and vitriol, and takes it to a public that is rather strongly positioned on the opposing side, how many of said public chases him around the block. I think in that, we can use the percentages and debate tolerance in America. If we go further and figure out where every one lives, we can discuss demographics and create graphical representations of where hatred has no tolerance and where it does. Shrug. But I have no intent of figuring out where you live, taking time to go there, figuring out who you are in the masses and using a city block to conduct my morning exercise. Now the threat made is the one you posted in email. Since we don't air such things on the boards, I won't. What I will say is that I'll do it for you. But again, in case you didn't grasp the meaning there, you can rest easy. I won't chase you around the block.

truckinslave -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 5:43:58 AM)
quote: Wow, Ann Coulter is now an authority on Communism. Well, what's important here is that she really is an expert on McCarthy. The book is Treason.

Moonhead -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 5:57:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: Wow, Ann Coulter is now an authority on Communism. Well, what's important here is that she really is an expert on McCarthy. The book is Treason. That's a bit of a non sequitor. If publishing a book is enough to make you an expert on something, does that mean that Kurt Vonnegut was an expert on time travel or Dennis Wheatley was an expert on Stanism as well? How about David Icke and Helena Blavatatsky?

samboct -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 6:11:12 AM)
"No it doesn't. Use the internet. BOOM. No editor. " Anything free is worth what you pay for it. The internet- if it is a resource, consists of human beings who may or may not have the skill set and the inclination to answer a question, but the idea that you could get editorial work done for free shows a lack of understanding of writing and business. quote: ORIGINAL: samboct So during GWB IIs administration, anybody could have put pictures of flag draped coffins out there? How about pictures of the collateral damage our weapons are doing. War is a bloody, brutal business. That we've gone to high tech weaponry which often removes the warfighter from the scene of the conflict (another issue that should have been debated before implementation) does not mean that the gore of war is gone- but there is precious little shown on the TV news or in newspapers. Sorry- but there's some form of censorship going on- it may not be as explicit as during WWII, but it's nevertheless present. Uhhhh..... Yeah. You could still put out any image you wanted too. I kind of recall this whole abu ghraib thing kicking off during Dubya's Presidency. Pretty sure he would have censored those photos if he could have. The fact that the photos from Abu Ghraib had to be smuggled out just confirms the existence of censoring organization. Your comment indicates how effective the censorship was. quote: ORIGINAL: samboct Another example- we've got a terrible failure in communication between reconnaissance and the boots on the ground. There is no way that IEDs should be effective with the aerial surveillance capabilities we have. Roads with convoys effectively have 24/7 coverage. And it's not easy to dig a hole big enough to put in a bomb large enough to take out a Humvee or larger. So why do our guys on the ground not know that there are bombs on the roadway ahead? And why hasn't anybody written articles on the subject? Okay now you are just talking out of your ass. You obviously have no idea of how angles of vision work, aerial surveillance or ambush strategies work. So just stop talking on the subject. One of us is using his anal orifice to communicate. I have my sources- current military and with a similar scientific background as mine. The failure to pass along information on the location of roadway IEDs is not technological, it's organizational due to a desire to not tip the hand on surveillance capabilities and something of a turf battle. Your gobbledygook about angles of vision casts suspicion about your actual knowledge of the subject. An aircraft flying at 100,000 feet has a detector that only has to work through a relatively narrow range of angles to maintain a certain level of accuracy. These aircraft are powered by solar cells and have duration measured in months. Currently under development are fuel cells with a 5 year cycle life. The fuel cell is charged by the solar cells and powers the aircraft at night. Lockmart is either developing a large blimp or it is now flying at 60,000 feet for extended periods of time for reconnaissance and communication. Akron Polymer Systems are looking for other applications for the polymer that was developed as the outer skin- they had a booth at a conference I attended. Sam

ScaryJello -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 6:26:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct Anything free is worth what you pay for it. The internet- if it is a resource, consists of human beings who may or may not have the skill set and the inclination to answer a question, but the idea that you could get editorial work done for free shows a lack of understanding of writing and business. I wasn't talking about editorial work. Use the internet as the platform for your truth not the news shows. Since you complained that you would be unable to be a journalist because the corporations bought the news outlets. Well they don't own the internet. quote: ORIGINAL: samboct One of us is using his anal orifice to communicate. I have my sources- current military and with a similar scientific background as mine. The failure to pass along information on the location of roadway IEDs is not technological, it's organizational due to a desire to not tip the hand on surveillance capabilities and something of a turf battle. I actually have a good basis of knowledge in the area seeing as I spent five of my six years in the military working at an intel unit. Okay. First off the issue is still not technological. All of the gathered information must be analyzed by humans. Also we don't have anywhere near the resources to cover every single inch of every single road. quote: ORIGINAL: samboct Your gobbledygook about angles of vision casts suspicion about your actual knowledge of the subject. An aircraft flying at 100,000 feet has a detector that only has to work through a relatively narrow range of angles to maintain a certain level of accuracy. These aircraft are powered by solar cells and have duration measured in months. Currently under development are fuel cells with a 5 year cycle life. The fuel cell is charged by the solar cells and powers the aircraft at night. Lockmart is either developing a large blimp or it is now flying at 60,000 feet for extended periods of time for reconnaissance and communication. Akron Polymer Systems are looking for other applications for the polymer that was developed as the outer skin- they had a booth at a conference I attended. The question isn't accuracy the question is coverage. We simply can't monitor every single inch of the ground. WE don't have the manpower, we don't have the equipment and we don't have the capability. Also IEDs aren't simply holes dug in the road. They can be shells of cars, corpses stuffed with explosives, guard rails filled with explosives. Hence the improvised part of the name. They don't have a uniform apperance. Field of vision. An airplane flying at 40,000 feet has a rather large field of vision, however that is only good for noticing large changes occuring, equipment being moved and such. That is the safest bit for the pilot and equipment. An UAV flying at 6,000 or much lower has a much narrower field of vision. We get greater detail, but of a smaller area and we alert the enemy to the aircraft. I would appreciate it in the future if you wouldn't imply that the intel community purposely allows soldiers to die.

ScaryJello -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 6:50:32 AM)
This is going no where.

samboct -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 7:02:54 AM)
To the earlier point about Fox News ownership- see this thread... http://www.collarchat.com/m_3376733/tm.htm Sam

samboct -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 7:34:43 AM)
In response to Scary Jello's comment that a UAV at 40k feet has insufficient resolution... http://www.dbcontrol.com/download/news001.PDF A UAV at 65,000 feet with 24 hr. loiter capability using synthetic aperture radar with an effective range of 25 miles has resolution measured in inches. Last time I checked, humans are typically 6 ft by 1.5 ft or so. Seems to me that's sufficient resolution to spot a human or two digging a hole or placing an IED. There are also some higher altitude UAVs that have longer times greater than 24 hours- but info on these aircraft is hard to find. I suspect that they are developments of the Helios Project out of Scaled Composites. From what I know about IEDs- they are pretty simple devices. Limited sensor capability since metal is detectable as are power sources. Consequently, if you're going to plant an IED- it has to be where our forces are- and your own people aren't since they'd trip it off. How many different roads do our convoys actually use? To the point about analysis- we've got how many people unemployed in this country? If we're lacking humans to analyze imagery in real time to prevent troops from being dismembered by IEDs, seems to me that we should be hiring more humans then. Sam

ScaryJello -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 8:00:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct In response to Scary Jello's comment that a UAV at 40k feet has insufficient resolution... http://www.dbcontrol.com/download/news001.PDF A UAV at 65,000 feet with 24 hr. loiter capability using synthetic aperture radar with an effective range of 25 miles has resolution measured in inches. Last time I checked, humans are typically 6 ft by 1.5 ft or so. Seems to me that's sufficient resolution to spot a human or two digging a hole or placing an IED. And how many of those are in service? Not many. They are expensive to maintain and operate. As such they are not the workhorse of the intel community. Also SAR has lots of issues. Clouds for one can devestate a SAR system. quote: ORIGINAL: samboct From what I know about IEDs- they are pretty simple devices. Limited sensor capability since metal is detectable as are power sources. Consequently, if you're going to plant an IED- it has to be where our forces are- and your own people aren't since they'd trip it off. How many different roads do our convoys actually use? Very rarely will an IED use sensor capability beyond a simple pressure plate or a remote detonation. Meaning they can watch and detonate when they choose to. Meaning that their own troops aren't in danger. Also metal and power sources aren't easily detectable as shown in movies due to the high concentration of scrap in the area. quote: ORIGINAL: samboct To the point about analysis- we've got how many people unemployed in this country? If we're lacking humans to analyze imagery in real time to prevent troops from being dismembered by IEDs, seems to me that we should be hiring more humans then. Only problem is that intel analysis requires a security clearance. Those are costly and time consuming to obtain. Once obtained there is quite a lot of training for an individual to undergo before they can even begin analyzing intel. Each different discipline has a school that lasts about six months which only trains people to the barest level of competance. They then have to complete additional studies as soon as they arrive at their first duty station. It isn't as simple as hiring a bum off of the street. I am going to take a wild guess that you have never served in the military or worked in the intel community.

samboct -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 8:31:30 AM)
" am going to take a wild guess that you have never served in the military or worked in the intel community." Good guess. I'm just one of those Ph.Ds that got tossed onto the scrap heap during the late 80s/90s when basic R+D was cut, and enormous sums were poured down the sinkhole of Star Wars and in a massive defense buildup. These days I work trying to commercialize advanced materials and attend conferences where I listen to both defense contractors and the military describe their wish lists. I also work with smaller firms developing technologies that should have been deployed years ago, except for the lackadaisical approach taken by the military for logistics and development of idiotic weapons systems such as the B-2, the F-35, Virginia Class submarines, stealth ships, etc. I've also heard the horror stories of firms that have developed technologies ranging from sorting bad rounds to improved water filtration but were unable to get contracts for their technology or nearly went broke trying. Another example is that development of better composites for armor is still being undertaken in a very limited manner. In terms of the intel community- well, I'm one of those people that were having a good belly laugh at the idea that the Iraqi's were developing chemical or bio based WMD- and I said so, at least a year prior to the Iraq invasion, posted on another site. All you had to do was ask the guys at DuPont, ICI etc whether the Iraqis had the capability- they didn't. Plant construction requires lots of supplies and specialized materials- it just wasn't there. I don't have a lot of respect for the intel community- it tends to ignore people like me with technical training or shoves them where they won't have an impact on national policy in order to appease a moron president's wishes. Sorry, I'm a bit older than you and clearly more cynical. I know that you think that the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are doing a good job and I agree that they're doing their best. But this country has not done well figuring out what they're doing there in the first place, or what tools they need to do the job. Cheers, Sam

jlf1961 -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 10:56:43 AM)
what does UAV's with SAR have to do with Islamophobia in America? The topic is the problems that the ultra conservatives and neocons are giving Muslim Americans.

thishereboi -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 11:06:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Gee - ya ever stop to wonder where 46% of Americans ever got an idea like that? quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I dont think anyone is suggesting this. TIME–Abt SRBI poll found that 46% of Americans believe Islam is more likely than other faiths to encourage violence against nonbelievers. That is a pretty big chunk of the population, kinda makes a strong argument that Islamophobia is a major problem in the United States. because maybe that 46 % only think muslims are capable of violence, because they ignore or are ignorant of other religions/sects/ cults bombing around the world since world war two. And ignorant of why America is reviled by so many other peoples around the world. This is really helping matters. and 54 % of americans are paying for that ignorance. Have you no shame? It is a pretty big leap from 46% believe Islam is more likely than other faiths to encourage violence against nonbelievers to 46 % only think muslims are capable of violence, because they ignore or are ignorant of other religions/sects/ cults bombing around the world since world war two. What was the actual question that led to this "fact"? What other faiths were listed in it? Where did they get the responders? How many people were polled?

Lucylastic -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 12:28:43 PM)
Im sure you know how to find google dont you, or find someone who gives a damn, mines broke The percentage could be 13 % I was making a point about ignorant rationalisations not figures if you dont get that then....fair enough kinda proves my point, but its not helping anything is it

thishereboi -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 6:46:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Im sure you know how to find google dont you, or find someone who gives a damn, mines broke The percentage could be 13 % I was making a point about ignorant rationalisations not figures if you dont get that then....fair enough kinda proves my point, but its not helping anything is it What point would that be? That you make statements and then when you get called on them, you claim you were just making a point? Who cares about the actual figures? Maybe you should consider a career with Fox?

Lucylastic -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 7:00:46 PM)
assumptions again dear I thought you were better than that I didnt make the figure up..I was responding to a figure and being facetious you know what facetious means dont you?? Ignorance and fear is down to lies and misinformation, there is an epidemic apparently, and there is WAY to much of it dont YOU care? Or is sniping all you can do in your impotence

jlf1961 -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/24/2010 7:30:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi It is a pretty big leap from 46% believe Islam is more likely than other faiths to encourage violence against nonbelievers to 46 % only think muslims are capable of violence, because they ignore or are ignorant of other religions/sects/ cults bombing around the world since world war two. What was the actual question that led to this "fact"? What other faiths were listed in it? Where did they get the responders? How many people were polled? The poll results can be found here. The full poll, background information and other pertinent data can be found here. However, actions speak louder than words, so here are some examples: quote: MURFREESBORO, Tenn. — Muslims trying to build houses of worship in the nation's heartland, far from the heated fight in New York over plans for a mosque near ground zero, are running into opponents even more hostile and aggressive. Foes of proposed mosques have deployed dogs to intimidate Muslims holding prayer services and spray painted "Not Welcome" on a construction sign, then later ripped it apart. AP source quote: In the last few months, Muslim groups have encountered unexpectedly intense opposition to their plans for opening mosques in Lower Manhattan, in Brooklyn and most recently in an empty convent on Staten Island. Some opponents have cited traffic and parking concerns. But the objections have focused overwhelmingly on more intangible and volatile issues: fear of terrorism, distrust of Islam and a linkage of the two in opponents’ minds. NY Times source

Aneirin -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/25/2010 2:00:11 AM)
America is turning into an intolerant nation, which only serves those who created the problems with these people in the first place well, for it gives them public license to pursue their nefarious activities overseas to line their own pockets in the name of foreign policy, you are being used. And as a result of foreign policy the people who have nothing to do with the situation apart from erroneously believing what they are told by those who with interests in rich pickings overseas suffer the consequences of corporate interests, which then brings in the militant mind and the desire to punish,all of which costs more and more in your taxes and your lives. Who wins in the end, the people ? Doubtful, unlikely, improbable. Corporate interests ? Always, every time , a job well done, Politicians ? Those with corporate interests undoubtedly, for it makes sense to follow the money in this world, not the ideals. Muslims who live and worship in America do so because they sought a tolerant nation away from the intolerance of the countries where their belief is centred, they have escaped the regimes we all see as wrong, but now because of foreign policy and it's consequences American citizens who have kept their belief are finding themselves threatened in a country where they believed religious tolerance was one of the founding principals carved in stone. Via corporate interests, via politicians, via military action the USA is being made intolerant to the very people who because of their mid way position between the enemy and America, could even be the healers we all seek. If a religious book is to be taken literally by one set of believers, why should that right not also extend to believers of another religion, as both books talk of converting and destroying unbelievers. People who seek nothing but to live and worship as they see fit are being threatened in a country where they once believed impossible, and for those of a certain mind, that threat forces defence and that defence with a certain mind can move to the best form of defence ; attack and a religious militant nut is created to threaten those who threaten first. With the religious threats in society comes a need to keep the peace and weed out the activist and with that comes the lightening of your pocket book and increased restrictions on your lives, you are giving those who oh so want power over you license to go ahead.

Rule -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/25/2010 4:17:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin Muslims who live and worship in America do so because they sought a tolerant nation away from the intolerance of the countries where their belief is centered, they have escaped the regimes we all see as wrong, That is not true. They went to the rich western countries in search of a job and wealth. They are themselves extremely intolerant of other religions, desire to introduce sharia law wherever they live and consider it their duty to murder adulterous women and to repress and harass gay men. quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin because of foreign policy and it's consequences American citizens who have kept their belief are finding themselves threatened in a country where they believed religious tolerance was one of the founding principals carved in stone. That religious tolerance was never about protecting religions. Its intent was to free people from repression by religions; it was and is anti-religious in nature. quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin Via corporate interests, via politicians, via military action the USA is being made intolerant to the very people who because of their mid way position between the enemy and America, could even be the healers we all seek. Healers? They have some good points, but "in cauda venenum". People who murder women and repress crime by extreme punishments are barbarians. quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin If a religious book is to be taken literally by one set of believers, why should that right not also extend to believers of another religion, as both books talk of converting and destroying unbelievers. Them is the barbarian books of the Jews. They became invalid when the pagan god of the Jews (and everybody else) was murdered many centuries before the birth of Jesus. The Quran was not written by Mohammed. quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin People who seek nothing but to live and worship as they see fit That is not true. They seek to introduce sharia law and to commit atrocities against adulterous women. quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin a religious militant nut is created to threaten those who threaten first. Such nuts are created purposely.

samboct -> RE: Islamophobia in America (8/25/2010 5:58:13 AM)
"That is not true. They seek to introduce sharia law and to commit atrocities against adulterous women." Excuse me? Most of the Muslims I've met in this country profess nothing of the sort to me- and I'm a Jew. (Well, not an observant Jew.) Actually, the ones I've met often tend to be about as Muslim as I am Jewish. Have you personally met any of these sharia desiring, rock throwing Muslims? Have we ever had a stoning of an adulterous (or not) woman in this country organized by a Muslim religious leader? Of course, if we go far back enough, we've certainly permitted burning of women at a stake as a public spectacle, but we've come a little way since then. Seems to me that this kind of crap is pretty similar to what the Jews have faced for centuries with claims of poisoned wells and a desire to sacrifice children. Were Muslims in this country cheering as the towers came down in 9/11? There were Muslims in those buildings that died with everyone else! Yes, other countries were different, but to Aneirin's point- the Muslims that come to this country are looking to escape religious intolerance. Besides, there are often lots of jobs in the oil and construction industry in Middle Eastern countries if the goal is wealth and religious intolerance. I think Aneirin is bang on. Sam

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875