Firstly, who the fuck are you? Actually dont tell me, I read a few posts and can clearly see your a dipshit. Stop talking about my name like we've had conversations.

 

And exactly HOW are you going to stop them from talking about you?
And people do not need to have a "conversation" with you to form an opinion about you, they simply have to look at your posts.

 

Okay, so I've read it. All right. You haven't bellyflopped into the hard-conspiracy (Dick and 'W' knocked down the towers), but just the soft-conspiracy (Dick and 'W' used 9/11 as an opportunity to go for a little profiteering adventure in Iraq, off the books).

And now that we have a good president, instead of a bad president, all the war profiteering is on the books again. Like the $600 million we spent in four days, to tighten the noose around Khaddafi, so that the Al Qaeda-supported rebels can start a shining new democracy in Libya, just like the shining new democracies that are being born in Egypt, and Yemen, and Tunisia, etc. Which means the wars are good wars, now, somehow, and all the blood being spilled is good blood, because President Obama has made the budget totally transparent, even though he didn't inform Congress of the order to assault Libya until after the fact, with a completely transparent memo... ahhh, sheesh. I feel my head starting to hurt again.

You know, Mr. Stumbler, I recall that, a mere two weeks ago, people on this forum were ripping a new one into anyone who had the nerve to suggest that Al Qaeda could be backing the Libyan rebels. And now, just two weeks later, the evidence is so overwhelming that the State-Controlled American Media has no choice but to concede that there are flickers of Al Qaeda, here and there, sprinkling their magic like fairy dust on the North African continent.

Two weeks ago, I had wished that I was wrong about the Libyan rebels. This week, I still hope I am wrong about my cynicism with regards to the peace and democracy loving Moslem Brotherhood. Meanwhile, you are absolutely right about everything, are you not? Mmmm. That must be nice.

You, my friend, are like a strident little pup on a beach, lost on his leash and stranded on a rapidly diminishing sandbar, as the tide comes in. The waves are slowly robbing you of your liberties, and you are too busy yapping to realize that the water is rising.

 

Oh, come on, silly! Don't you remember? We're best pals! We have a common girlfriend, Miss Kimiko!!! Okay, I'll refresh your memory, because as much as I love you, you can be a boor and a dweeb, like our other good pal, Mr. Stumbler. Anyhoo, a couple weeks ago I suggested there can be several ways of being right, depending on one's perspective and so forth. You told me I am wrong. I apologized for being wrong, so I figured that maybe we're still bosom friends and everything.

So cheer up and don't be a poop.

 

He and I have had convo. He's just being a loveable dweeb as usual. He's an oafus, but he really is very nice.

 

fuck the muslims, i'm just kidding.

 

I thought I addressed that direct contradiction of your position but obviously not clearly enough so I'll try again.

You may claim to have Muslim friends but then you also claim we in the west, the world in fact are threatened by Muslims, you claim (apparently falsely since you can't give an example other than France) have entrenched Sharia law in European Countries. You advocate military insursions into Pakistan which we do on a daily basis anyway even though Pakistan is our ally and actively engaged in and suffering from fighting the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

Plus promote the really irrational and illogical ideas that somehow Muslims out number Christians, and could raise a million person army (which is actually really small as far as armies go) and threaten to take over the world.

All of those ideas and misinformation sure indicates prejudice against Muslims on your part to me.

I'm all for it but not like tit for bullshit and stuff like that.

In the lead up to the invasion of Iraq Halliburton's parent company (or front company) received a now bid contract to provide, housing, bathrooms and showers, and food services for our troops. You did hear about the fecal matter in the water hospitalizing some of our combat troops and troops getting electrocuted in the showers KBR built didn't you, or would you would you like me to site some sources for that.

Anyway through those hundreds of pages of a no bid contract worth billions and billions at the very end of it there was a one or two paraghraph statement that also gave all oilfield services work to Halliburton under the same no bid conditions.

If that's now a little profiteering adventure in Iraq I don't know what is.

Yes that is my observation and belief at least.

On no just the amount of money congress is appropriating for the two wars which are now on the federal budget when that was not the case with President Bush.

But thanks to inaction and in some cases favoritism on the part of congress the profiteering and down right theft and fraud continues mostly unabated. In fact I read a story not long ago that thanks to the regulations in place a contractor can get caught committing fraud or inferior workmanship and still be able to get more government contracts.

You'd think conservatives so concerned about the federal deficit and government waste would do something about that wouldn't you?

But I wouldn't because I know the lie of conservatism as it is preached and practiced in this nation is the most expensive lie in history.

Aren't you getting a little on the hysterical side again here. I already pointed out to you in fact that one of the consistent conservative/Republican/Tea Bagger hypocrisies is that they claim we're broke but they can always find money for military action somewhere.

Just like they did when they were screaming for US intervention and a no fly zone or even invasion from day one without considering the very same unknowns you just mentioned above.

Well that sure remains to be seen and considering those countries state of development, infrastructure, history and divisions the chances of that are pretty remote. But no matter what they come up with its bound to be better than propped up and failing dictatorships.

But again you project this fear into the far flung future instead of simply acknowledging what is really happening right now. An unprecedented and totally unpredicted mass uprising taking place across an entire region with people demanding and dying for freedom and democracy.

That's actually really amazing and the most pro western sign to come out of the middle east for more than 60 years at least.

But let's look at you're worst case scenario here for a second and see if there is any real threat there if all of them turn to fundamentalist Muslim nations?

Other than a possible increase in the price of oil I'm just not seeing any threat there at all. The true fact no one forgets is fuck with us and we can vaporize you and your turn whole region to glass in a matter of seconds.

Mess with Israel and you reap the same fate.

Nope, these fears of Muslims and even Muslim nations seem entirely irrational and illogical to me. In fact for all intents and purposes all but impossible.

You really get to rambling once you get rolling don't you Clarise? Whoa talk about your run-ons.

But I'll try.

Nope in my opinion both our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are really bad wars that since we lived through Vietnam should have known better than to even try.

There is no good blood spilled because most of it is unnecessary but lots of bad blood being made because I bet we create 10 terrorists for everyone we kill and its insane to think we can kill them all anyway.

And yes having the costs of both wars on the budget and making congress properly appropriate money for them is a much more transparent and honest approach to our budget process. Its better than the conservative lie and spend policies that's for sure in my opinion.

Also I think you either need to clarify or retract what you mean by President Obama not informing congress prior to authorizing military action in Libya because as it stands not the statement is false.

President Obama certianly informed key members of congress every step of the way including his decision to join the UN Resolution and commit US military resources to enforcing it.

So saying he didn't inform congress is not factually true. He didn't call a session of congress and bring it to a vote but neither has any other president since World War II and there are more than a dozen examples of former presidents doing exactly what President Obama just did.

And your head is starting to hurt because you've allowed yourself to fly off the handle and start hyper verbalizing responding only emotionally instead or rationally and reasonably.

You're just way to upset right now to even make sense.

Show me that overwhelming evidence will you Clarise? I'd be very interested in seeing proof that Al Qaeda is behind the uprising in Libya because the only one I've heard say that is Gaddafi and I don't exactly believe him.

But I will believe overwhelming proof if you show it to me.

No I not only don't think I'm right about everything; even if I did there are plenty of people around here who have proven otherwise on many occasions.

But again show me where you were wrong about who the Libyan rebels are? I'd really like to see that from credible sources and you could school me on it.

Also I guess we can watch the Muslim Brotherhood but are they a bigger threat to us right now than Sovereign Citizens are? Or the KKK? Or our good ol' down home far right wing terrorists.

It was not Muslims in Tucson. It was not Muslims who planted the bomb on the Parade route on Martin Luther King Day. Its not Muslims killing doctors who perform abortions or bombing abortion clinics.

While in the meantime I can't think of a single example of the Muslim Brotherhood attacking us and while the Muslim Brotherhood was banned as a political party, members of the Muslim Brotherhood who ran as independents have been in the Egyptian legislature for decades but never got more than 20% of the seats.

I never say my liberties erode further than the first time someone told me I had to piss in a cup to keep my job. Its all been really down hill since the conservative/Republicans under Ronald Reagan changed our most basic legal concept from innocent until proven guilty to guilty until proven innocent.

And I shuddered to watch president Bush lie to the American Public so he could invade Iraq but not as bad as I did then and do now every time I see the patriot act.

But tell me this Clarise. What does your statement about me allegedly being robbed of my liberties have to do with people in this nation trying to deny Muslims their constitutionally guaranteed liberties?

Nothing does it? Its not my rights and liberties at stake here. Its whether Muslims in this nation actually have the rights and privileges the constitution guarantees them.

I'm the one who is actually standing up for constitutional rights here.

Does that remain true if the opinion is not based on facts, based on false facts, or based on irrational and illogical fear driven non-fact based emotional responses.

I don't think you can really make a case for anything being right or equally viable if its based of fears or false foundations.

 

My use of "wrath" in my opener was tongue-in-cheek. As I have said. That you persist in harping on it, I had been taking as an effort to keep the gag running. But now I am leaning toward thinking that you really did not understand the intent.

Here is why.

I am not referring to liberties conferred by the Constitution and/or the nation in which we live. I am using the word in the sense of the progressively eroding freedom of movement allowed to your thoughts, due to constraints imposed by your belief system. The common idiom would be that you are "painting yourself into a corner." Absolutism devolves toward the kind of intellectual paralysis toward which you are descending.

Your game works on many of the people here. It is not difficult to sit back, demand an incontrovertible rebuttal to the verity of your opinions, and then pick away at words and phrases like "wrath," and "liberty," and "paranoia," and "flicker," with no consideration as to context or intent, and then declare (to anyone who may still be awake) that you have bested your adversaries, defended your positions, and have therefore proven that you are absolutely right.

It does not work on me. I see through the game, by looking ahead at the corner in which you are painting yourself. In the time it would take me to absolutely prove that Al Qaeda is active in Libya, the Executive Branch might have armed them. Yet even the Obama administration (for which I have no love, believe me), is more flexible, in terms of the liberties allowed by its belief systems, than you appear to be, and they seem to be setting policies and rules of engagement with more caution and circumspection than you would.

And where would your absolutism take us, if widespread war were to break out in the Middle East? You have said it yourself. They would never gun for us, because we could nuke them to glass; they would never really attempt to eradicate the state of Israel, because Israel could nuke them to glass.

I have to think that, with a modicum of circumspection and some flexibility in terms of thought and belief, we just might be lucky enough not to paint ourselves into that corner.

I have digressed more than I had intended. Enough. Your turn. Parse the hell out of it. Go to town.

 

Stop encouraging the parsing king.

 

Well hello Clarise. Back again?

I simply pointed out that was a mischaracterization of my posts, which you actually agreed to if you'll recall, and that was actually an error on your part. But this might help. I personally recommend it often.

http://www.writingwithclarity.com/

Something you could really benefit from as we shall soon see.

See that one right there Clarise (and I made it a little bigger to be sure). You're doing it again. What you say might be true if I've ever thought let alone spoken in absolute terms. Nothing could be further from the truth or reality on a personal level but I contend not there is not one hint of "absolutism" in any of my posts.

And if I'm mistaken please provide the examples.

Because I'm saying that it is irrational fears and illogical and impossible conclusions that threaten all our liberties including those who happen to be Muslim Americans.

Now. Clarise my dear are so totally unaccustomed to providing any evidence of your beliefs or conclusion that you cannot fathom someone might request examples taken from the texts of our discussion its some foreign concept to you? Becauser I personally find that highly suspect and make the request anyway.

You only have a point of me painting myself into a corner and losing my liberties if there are absolutes so lets see them my dear.

Then is it so difficult to address things like whether Muslims out number Christians. Whether there is a power differential? Whether there is a REAL possibility of Sharia law in the us given the numbers or Muslims taking over the world.

Clarise let me ask you again. When you make the statement that Shaira Law has been "entrenched" (that was your word remember?) in European countries and all you're asked to do is provide examples other than France that's some game or incrontrovertable rebuttal? No I don't think so. I think those are pretty simple and straight forward questions that tend to reveal a lot of false assumptions and claims on your part.

This to me is simply another false accusation on your part, Clarise.

But didn't you say that you started out thinking the Libyan rebels were good but now that there was "overwhelming evidence" of them being Al Qaeda you had changed your mind.

So I have to ask you Clarise just how tough, how much would it take out out your day to provide even a single link to any evidence at all? Not very much I don't think. Most of us on the forum have no trouble at all.

Which I think pretty clearly proves all the above is just a very verbose dodge.

But is that your wrath coming out again?

Stop right there. If you cannot provide examples of my "absolutism" both you and your argument are completely discredited.

So please (for the second time now) provide examples of my absolutism thinking?

Either Israel or the US or the West would vaporize them and turn the Middle East to glass with our Nuclear Weapons.

I thought we covered this?

Then your point above and at this point would be what Clarise?

Again I can't recommend this highly enough.

http://www.writingwithclarity.com/

What corner Clarise (and please don't forget to add the absolutism this time)? What corner are we painting ourselves into by denying American Muslims the rights guaranteed under our constitution?

You do remember the topic don't you?

I think I have fulfilled you requests here.

 

I've gotta tell ya,, I'm really liking clarise, now.....:excited:

 

Yea i seen how outraged they were ..dancing in the streets,,

 

I ain't surprised Ace but personally I don't think she's any better than you are at presenting a factual, reality based argument.

PS I have to keep going back to this Ace. The utter hypocrisy of people saying they believe and respect the Constitution of the United States of America until it comes to Muslims. That just pisses all over everything the Constitution is supposed to stand for.

 

Sheesh. Another tome from Stumbler. I stopped on the first paragraph. Mr. S., you're still stuck on wrath! I did not "admit" to anything. I intentionally used the word ironically, and ironically, I intended it as a snide compliment. I was flattered that "the great one," my words, had taken his time and had deigned to waste effort on a lowlife such as myself, to cast his proverbial (and purely figurative) fire and brimstone. But here again, you've taken the word entirely out of context, and missed the point.

So, no. This time, I did not read on. Sophistry, sophistry, sophistry. Sheesh.

One more thing. Do you think that by constantly exhorting me to calm down, you are convincing anyone on this board, with the possible exception of Miss Kimiko, that you are not absolutely stark raving hysterical over my refusal to kowtow to all your lukewarm kool-aid?

That question is rhetorical. I do not mean kool-aid, literally. It is a metaphor. I really mean Tang. Or is it Zarex? Or could it really be Hi-C?? (I am partial to Grapefruit, myself, poured through a sieve of ice and sunlight. (A quote from one of my books (but don't go looking for it (because I'm an awful writer (and not worth the effort))))).

God, I wish I had a V-8. Oh, wait, that would run on fossil fuel. No, not fossil fuel. I can prove conclusively that V-8 does not contain motor oil, but it could contain peanut residues, which constitutes "oil" in another sense and could, indeed, be utilized as an alternate fuel.

Ahhh, my head!

 

I'm watching the elections but have to wonder if its that painful for you Clarise why do you keep coming back but not addressing any of the points of discussion?

 

Huh?

 

A lot of Muslims DO live under Sharia Law -- they just interpret it very differently from the right-wing crazies who insist that it's all about stoning women to death. For your average Muslim, Sharia is just a code of conduct, similar to the Judeo-Christian laws presented in the Bible. But I haven't seen any attempts to pass a law requiring kosher food, and I don't expect Muslims to try to get any similar laws passed. They simply live according to their interpretation of the Koran.

 

Yes you did right here Clarise.

Unbelievable as this statement is, and I'm sure it was some kind of attempt at humor, "loquacoious largesse" and wrath are not the same things at all. And the only reason we're having this discussion is because I pointed out none of my responses to you have been wrathful in the slightest while I can't really say the same for some of yours.

But you're the one carrying on in post after post bringing this wrath thing up rather than address any of the real points of discussion.

You're really not tracking well in this discussion are you?

No I think instead of me missing the point you have completely missed the character and tone of my posts and responses to you. I don't consider myself the "great one." I don't consider you a lowlife, and I don't believe I have said anything that would indicate I do. And I also don't believe you can cite a single example of me using fire and brimstone.

But why spend all this valuable discussion time simply trying to falsely characterize what I said instead of just dealing with the actual topic of US prejudice and discrimination against Muslims?

I think the only reason for that is because you're made a lot of false statements, as well as displayed irrational, illogical, and contradictory beliefs about Muslims and the threat if any they represent to US and the world.

You didn't read on but I notice that doesn't stop you from talking on. But about what Clarise is what I'm having trouble understanding?

Although I guess you admit it with your reference to sophistry because isn't that what you're really doing that this point; presenting a plausible but fallacious and misleading argument.

Because you're sure not telling the truth about the things I've said nor addressing them nor admitting your own errors and fallacies that pertain to the actual discussion.

Freudian slip there I believe Clarise.

Oh I don't believe that either Clarise because I if I recall that's another thing you've said pretty often is just one more thing or you're done with the discussion.

No. Since I just searched this entire thread and did not find a single reference to me telling you to calm down even once let alone constantly I think this might very well be the most delusional things you've said yet.

And in fact this doesn't even make sense. I'm not drinking kool aid or trying to make anyone kowtow. That's just another dishonest characterization on your part Clarise.

I'm trying to have a rational and reasonable discussion about prejudice and discrimination as well as misconceptions about Muslims but all you want to do is keep up this personal attack it appears to me.

Quite partial to misdirection and attempted humor I notice as well. But once again it doesn't have anything to do the prejudice and discrimination against Muslims, irrational and illogical fears of creeping Sharia law in the US or Muslims taking over the world.

Not to mention your own misstatements and misconceptions such as Muslims out number Christian by how much did you say it was "by an order of magnitude"?

And claims that Sharia law is already entrenched in European countries without being able to provide a single example while France is actively outlawing some parts of Shaira law.

But fear not I can assure you I won't be looking for any of your books and tend to agree with you on the rest of it.

No wonder your head hurts the way you wonder around and ramble on about nonsense like this.

Why don't you just stop? Ever wondered about that? I sure have.

 

What fun! :lol: This "clarise" has rhetorical balls the size of watermelons! Stumbler, I hope you're at least grinning as you try to be all serious, Mr. Gruffypants.

The postings of "clarise" remind me of the political stance and writing style of a certain other contributor who was thumped out of this place for facetiously claiming to be 12 years old. Twin sister, perhaps?

 

Wait I think I did read an example of creeping Jewish law because there was something about who's kosher and who's not and who can legally claim that.

In the meantime I wonder if dancing is still against the law in some states or locals? I should look that one up.

But there there's still legal discrimination against atheists in Arkansas where contrary to the specific statement in the Constitution that there shall be no religious test for holding elected office Arkansas has a law prohibiting Atheists from holding office or testifying in trials.

What kind of Sharia is that?