• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ilhan Omar controversy with 9/11 cover

oneworld2 said:
I have told you before I haven't the time or inclination for your posts so I tend not to read through three links (there was ONE link, and the article was short) trying to find out what and where , if any , the connection is.

If you agreed with me there was always the choice of just saying that. So much simpler imho

Great we agree on something. Must happen every time Notre Dame is burned to the ground
Click to expand...

You didn't even read the article, but chose to respond.

In other words, you choose to look like an fool.

Got it.
 
Fledermaus said:
The old "I read/saw it somewhere that can't be found" ploy.

You do that a lot.
Click to expand...

wiki said:
Soon after the attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States Government began detaining people who fit the profile of the suspected hijackers: mostly male, Arabic or Muslim noncitizens. By late November 2001, more than 1,200 people had been detained and held incommunicado (Without the means or right to communicate).
Click to expand...

Detentions following the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia
 
KAG2020 said:
She is already the antiChrist.

AntiTrump seems a little anti-climactic
Click to expand...

" The antichrist " ???

How many are there ? According to people like you Obama was the antichrist when he came to office. I used to be on another site full of right wing loons saying just that. They were convinced that if you could get a close enough image of those short black and grey hairs on his noggin you would be able to make out the 666 mark of the beast lol
 
SmartCat said:
I have read the Koran in three English translations. Islam is a religion that bases its entire authority on the word of honor of one man. Mohammed came before the Arab people with the Koran and said, "This was dictated to me by the Angel Gabriel. Trust me. It was."

By contrast, the Bible was written during a period of about 14,000 years. It was written by many men, and perhaps a few women. If the whole thing is a hoax, you have to imagine a conspiracy lasting that long and involving all those people.

Israel does not threaten the existence of Arab world. The Arab world threatens the existence of Israel.
Click to expand...

My guess is that you interest in Muslims and the Koran came after the terror attacks in the US

I don't think humans have been writing , let alone writing the Bible , for 14,000 years.

If you are saying you find the Bible more credible than the Koran all's I would say good for you but I really don't care for what I consider to be fairy tales.

As the only nuclear power in the ME and the regional superpower in military terms your contention is patently absurd. How about they pose existential threats to one another ?
 
oneworld2 said:
Detentions following the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
This article needs additional citations for verification. (September 2009)
This article may need to be rewritten entirely to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards. (September 2009)
This article possibly contains original research. (September 2009)

That and you are defending someone famous for MSU then when asked for citation it is "The web page disappeared" or "it was in a book I lent out"
 
SmartCat said:
Why not. The Jews have done it again and again.

The Jews returned in peace to the land God gave them. They did not initiate the use of violence. They had no need to. They could out compete Arabs peacefully academically and economically. When they were attacked they fought back and won. That is the history of the Arab Israeli conflict.

I am confident that virtually everyone in the West who takes the side of Palestine against Israel would rather live in Israel than in any Arab country in the world.
Click to expand...

Im not a fan of vicious ethnostates run by a far right psychopath who hates Palestinians so much he jumps on the holocaust revisionist bandwagon to blame it on arabs. they ****ing didnt peacefully return to the land some fictitious sky fairy gave to them. That was done by the allied powers after WW II for more practical reasons. The land they got was part of the former British empire. You have a very evangelical view of this conflict that is not grounded in reality.
 
oneworld2 said:
I would agree with you summarization of Trump and would only add that I think he would score high on the Hare Test too . I think you are pretty good on Omars outlook too. I think I said earlier here that I don't think anyone is above criticism either so we are on the same page for most of this. I just see the treatment of the likes of Omar , Tulsi Gabbard , AOC etc as an establishment suffocation of the predictable response to their abandonment of the 99% and I count the Democrats as part of that establishment fiercely trying to maintain the status quo. Sure these new people are going to make mistakes , same as everyone else , but the enormous magnifying glass aimed at this new blood is pretty **** to watch

I must tell you I am not an American and live in the UK so as such I am an outsider looking in and I think the Democrats response to Trump has been pathetic and has actually made his position stronger within his base. They are in flux because they are being outed as republicans with different coloured ties and their own base is beginning to see through them

My view on our wonderful western democracies is that they have largely been a sham to hide the fact that our societies are run by and for the rich , a one party ( The Business Party ) state with the charade of democracy acting like blinkers. These are interesting times and I agree with Michael Moore's analysis of how and why Trump came to power , it being the " biggest F U " vote in US history. And imo it was aimed against the one party state oligarchy of which Trump is a part he just fooled enough people into thinking he wasn't
Click to expand...

The place where Moore's critique fails IMO is that he can't deal with the question, "how can you control the one percent without having the controls rebound on the ninety-nine percent?" I don't have a solution either, but Moore won't ask the question as to what's going to motivate the rich to be "wealth creators" if they're hemmed in by regulations. Socialism's solution has been to bring Big Business under the aegis of government, and even if one doesn't care to view Soviet Russia as representative of "true Socialism," there were enough similarities to prove that total government control does not work, either for the rich or for the poor.

Omar in my view is even worse, because she's only concerned with benefiting her particular ethnicity, rather than having any broader concept of true diversity. She's the Spike Lee of Muslim-Americans.
 
Fledermaus said:
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
This article needs additional citations for verification. (September 2009)
This article may need to be rewritten entirely to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards. (September 2009)
This article possibly contains original research. (September 2009)

That and you were defending someone famous for MSU then when asked for citation it is "The web page disappeared" or "it was in a book I lent out"
Click to expand...

Okay , no probs , so who are these people trying to sue government officials on precisely those grounds ?

NPR said:
In the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, hundreds of mostly Muslim immigrants were rounded up and held in harsh conditions in New York. They later sued, but on Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that high-ranking Justice Department officials from the George W. Bush administration were immune from those lawsuits.
Click to expand...

Supreme Court Rules Post-9/11 Detainees Can't Sue Top U.S. Officials : NPR

businessinsider said:
The justices by a 4-2 vote on Monday ended a long-running lawsuit against former Attorney General John Ashcroft, former FBI Director Robert Mueller and other top Bush administration officials.
Click to expand...

Supreme Court rules that Muslims detained after 9/11 can't sue the government - Business Insider

the Guardian said:
The civil rights lawsuit sought to hold the former officials responsible for racial and religious profiling and abuse in detention that the plaintiffs said they endured after being swept up following the 2001 attacks by al-Qaida militants on the US.
Click to expand...

Supreme court rules Bush officials cannot be sued over 9/11 detentions | US news | The Guardian

I will defend who I want to defend and it will not be influenced by you , be sure on that
 
oneworld2 said:
I don't see why she would have to specifically condemn just Muslim terrorists in order to satisfy her naysayers and cannot tell you what comments she has made on terrorists and terrorism

Why can't you just condemn terrorist regardless of their religious convictions ?

Maybe she is overcompensating on a wish to fight discrimination against Muslims by purposefully avoiding more direct references to terrorism and terrorists.
Click to expand...

That's the nub of the problem as stated by the OP. Suppose one could prove that she's overcompensating to benefit innocent people who don't deserve condemnation for the acts of terrorists. Does she actually accomplish her goal by papering over the acts of terrorists with a bland phrase like, "some people did something?" I would say that she ended up stoking hostility rather than reducing it-- and this could have been prevented if she didn't have the tendency to portray herself as embattled by WASP prejudice.
 
oneworld2 said:
Okay , no probs , so who are these people trying to sue government officials on precisely those grounds ?



Supreme Court Rules Post-9/11 Detainees Can't Sue Top U.S. Officials : NPR



Supreme Court rules that Muslims detained after 9/11 can't sue the government - Business Insider



Supreme court rules Bush officials cannot be sued over 9/11 detentions | US news | The Guardian

I will defend who I want to defend and it will not be influenced by you , be sure on that
Click to expand...

You and a Conspiracy Theorist are a good match...

You both believe in fantasies and reject realities.
 
oneworld2 said:
The Palestinians that fled or were forced out thought they could return and allowing them to stay was considered counterproductive to that aim by the Arab state leaders of the time.





I would say they had their own struggles in grappling with newly acquired self determination and found the Palestinians to be an awkward encumbrance in that situation



Because it was in their interests to. And , if we are to be honest , the state of Israel actually worked hard to encourage them to leave even though they didn't want to. As time went by and hostilities occurred more Jews that were happy living elsewhere were basically forced out by the ongoing deterioration of the situation
Click to expand...

Right; I'm saying that the "counterproductive" aspects of assimilation came down to using the Palestinians as a talking-point.

It's not unlikely that some Israeli politicians tried to encourage the Jewish exiles to seek their fortunes elsewhere. No government wants to absorb a new population. But to my understanding, the exiles to Israel were at least given the option to stay.
 
SmartCat said:
Other Arabs do not care about the Palestinians any more than I do. They use the Palestinians to justify their hatred for Israel. They hate Israel because the Israelis can do everything better than they can. That is the reason for all hostility toward the Jews.
Click to expand...

Well, it also has to do with Islamic concepts about keeping total dominion over their own bailiwick. These may not be all that different from the U.S.'s sense of being threatened by Socialist political systems in the western hemisphere.
 
Ouroboros said:
The place where Moore's critique fails IMO is that he can't deal with the question, "how can you control the one percent without having the controls rebound on the ninety-nine percent?" I don't have a solution either, but Moore won't ask the question as to what's going to motivate the rich to be "wealth creators" if they're hemmed in by regulations. Socialism's solution has been to bring Big Business under the aegis of government, and even if one doesn't care to view Soviet Russia as representative of "true Socialism," there were enough similarities to prove that total government control does not work, either for the rich or for the poor.

Omar in my view is even worse, because she's only concerned with benefiting her particular ethnicity, rather than having any broader concept of true diversity. She's the Spike Lee of Muslim-Americans.
Click to expand...

My citation of Moore was on very specific grounds wrt what motivated enough people to vote for such a narcissistic horror of humanity like Trump and how the Democrats sparked Russia gate as a response to it. I thought that much was pretty obvious. I don't want to get involved further in a debate about the 1% V the 99% because it is going further away from the subject matter of this thread and I only mentioned it due to your wish to paint everyone on the Left as the same , well that's what it was starting to sound a lot like to me. That said I think that " wealth creators " being used in such a narrow way to only include the 1% themselves is as erroneous as it is dismissive of the role of the 99%. There is a symbiotic relationship going on here and it is daft to think one would prosper without the other or to think that more regulation would necessarily strangle entrepreneurship

I really really don't see how you can claim Omar is " even worse " than Trump. Each to their own and all but I find that a stretch and then some
 
SmartCat said:
I have read the Koran in three English translations. Islam is a religion that bases its entire authority on the word of honor of one man. Mohammed came before the Arab people with the Koran and said, "This was dictated to me by the Angel Gabriel. Trust me. It was."

By contrast, the Bible was written during a period of about 14,000 years. It was written by many men, and perhaps a few women. If the whole thing is a hoax, you have to imagine a conspiracy lasting that long and involving all those people.

Israel does not threaten the existence of Arab world. The Arab world threatens the existence of Israel.
Click to expand...

This, "about 14,000 years," should be written "about 3,300 years."
 
oneworld2 said:
My guess is that you interest in Muslims and the Koran came after the terror attacks in the US

I don't think humans have been writing , let alone writing the Bible , for 14,000 years.

If you are saying you find the Bible more credible than the Koran all's I would say good for you but I really don't care for what I consider to be fairy tales.

As the only nuclear power in the ME and the regional superpower in military terms your contention is patently absurd. How about they pose existential threats to one another ?
Click to expand...

Thank you for correcting me about the number of years. "14,000 years" should be "3,300 years."

The oldest part of the Bible is probably "The Song of the Sea," Exodus 15:1-18.

"The Song of the Sea is noted for its archaic language. It is written in a style of Hebrew much older than that of the rest of Exodus. Most scholars consider it the oldest surviving text describing the Exodus, dating to the pre-monarchic period. An alternative is that it was deliberately written in an archaic style, a known literary device.[3] Proposed dates range from the 13th to the 5th century BCE.[4]"

Song of the Sea - Wikipedia

I am interested in comparative religion. I read my first English translation of the Koran before 9/11.
 
Last edited:
bomberfox said:
Im not a fan of vicious ethnostates run by a far right psychopath who hates Palestinians so much he jumps on the holocaust revisionist bandwagon to blame it on arabs. they ****ing didnt peacefully return to the land some fictitious sky fairy gave to them. That was done by the allied powers after WW II for more practical reasons. The land they got was part of the former British empire. You have a very evangelical view of this conflict that is not grounded in reality.
Click to expand...

What matters is that the Jews who returned to what was called "Palestine" at the time did so with the permission of the Ottomans, and then with the permission of the British. Those were the people who governed Palestine at the time. The Jews did not initiate the use of violence. They bought the land they settled.
 
Ouroboros said:
Well, it also has to do with Islamic concepts about keeping total dominion over their own bailiwick. These may not be all that different from the U.S.'s sense of being threatened by Socialist political systems in the western hemisphere.
Click to expand...

I am not threatened by "Socialist political systems in the western hemisphere." I want the United States to evolve in a social democratic direction. That is why I voted for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 primary. I like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, but I distrust her commitment to the safety and well being of Israel.

All of Israel plus the West Bank is less than one percent of all Arab land. I want the Jews to have all of it. They deserve it by right of conquest. Germany lost territory after losing World War I, and more territory after losing World War II. Losing territory is the cost of starting aggressive wars and losing them.
 
bomberfox said:
What kind of idiot would think evening things out in something this disgusting and likely something that will stir violence towards Ilhan is of concern to leftists? *** off
Click to expand...
:roll:

It's Ilhan who invites violence to herself! "Some people did something...., indeed." Lol.
Like what? Vandalized some street signs? Like, she doesn't know who the perpetrators were?
She comes out downplaying the most atrocious attack on US soil that killed THOUSANDS!
She's shown she's an idiot!
And yet, she got Pelosi lapping right out of her hand - we know now who's the bigger idiot! :mrgreen:

Well.....someone did something in New Zealand! It's just one of those silly things.
There. How does she likes that?
 
Last edited:
SmartCat said:
Thank you for correcting me about the number of years. "14,000 years" should be "3,300 years."

The oldest part of the Bible is probably "The Song of the Sea," Exodus 15:1-18.

"The Song of the Sea is noted for its archaic language. It is written in a style of Hebrew much older than that of the rest of Exodus. Most scholars consider it the oldest surviving text describing the Exodus, dating to the pre-monarchic period. An alternative is that it was deliberately written in an archaic style, a known literary device.[3] Proposed dates range from the 13th to the 5th century BCE.[4]"

Song of the Sea - Wikipedia

I am interested in comparative religion. I read my first English translation of the Koran before 9/11.
Click to expand...

No worries. I don't go in for religion myself , so when I see/hear people favouring one over another it doesn't really mean anything to me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom