Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » 26 US Republican Governors (and 1 Democratic Gov) give ISIS exactly what they want (Page 6)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7   
Author Topic: 26 US Republican Governors (and 1 Democratic Gov) give ISIS exactly what they want
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by scifibum:
quote:
Originally posted by Rafi:
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
Often the cure to fear is the same as the cure for ignorance. But, dear Lord, is it hard work to get fearful people to listen to facts.

How many of them will you sponsor and offer a room in your home?
How many fallacies can you identify in this bit of rhetoric?
Perhaps that made you feel better, that's good.

But the point is, put your money where your mouth is. Based on your acting out, and the others tantrums, I was more on point than I thought. You want to gamble with lives, gamble with yours first. Once I see the courage of your convictions, perhaps I'll listen. Until then, it's mindless rhetoric designed to make you feel morally superior but it's just posturing. Feels good I suppose. Is feeling good good enough?

Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Since Tom asks me to guess which post "set me [Tom] off" was it this one?

quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
I do try to give you the facts, Pete.

Noted.

That makes one of you. Master Wessex, Davidson and Davidson Otho proceeds with hostile psychoanalysis

Is that the post that "set off" your seven point hostile psychoanalysis?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rafi:
quote:
Originally posted by scifibum:
quote:
Originally posted by Rafi:
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
Often the cure to fear is the same as the cure for ignorance. But, dear Lord, is it hard work to get fearful people to listen to facts.

How many of them will you sponsor and offer a room in your home?
How many fallacies can you identify in this bit of rhetoric?
Perhaps that made you feel better, that's good.

But the point is, put your money where your mouth is. Based on your acting out, and the others tantrums, I was more on point than I thought. You want to gamble with lives, gamble with yours first. Once I see the courage of your convictions, perhaps I'll listen. Until then, it's mindless rhetoric designed to make you feel morally superior but it's just posturing. Feels good I suppose. Is feeling good good enough?

Hey, send me a Druze, Christian or Yazidi Syrian refugee. I have an extra room now. Just need $300/no for shared rent and power.

Or are you going to obfuscate the difference between "risking life" being willing and financially able to pay for resettlement? I'lol put my money where my mouth is but my money ain't enough to feed and shelter another.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Also, Raf, you responded to Kate, who has never, in my recollection, pitched anything like a tantrum. She posted a Link to a very fiscally and socially conservative think tank, the Cato institute.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
*sigh* Pete, that's exactly the sort of thing I mean. You think you're being clever, there, but it's just tiresome.

[Tom continues to rave about Pete's dick]

Don't know if you missed it, but DW seemed to find my remark interesting. You are not the only one here that matters, and not everyone shares your taste.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Is that the post that "set off" your seven point hostile psychoanalysis?
Close, but not quite.
If you got to that one, though, you can probably figure out the central issue, and figure out what exact sort of dickishness you're exhibiting. So please stop.


Tom: Please see your email. -OrneryMod

[ November 22, 2015, 02:19 PM: Message edited by: OrneryMod ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ah. Then it was when I criticized G3's attack on Kate in a way that made it impossible for you to pretend that I shared his position. [Big Grin]

Glad to surprise you. This is a breakthrough! Just kidding, obviously. loL.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I have to say, though, Tom, that this whole "guess why I'm abusing you" game is a new sadomasochistic low. Fortunately you'be caught me at my 18 month sobriety date and deliriously happy (other than reading Mother Night for pedagogical reasons)=
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Do you really seek to pretend that I am abusing you, Pete?

I am asking you to not be a stupid dick. You consider that abuse?


Tom: Please see your email. -OrneryMod

[ November 22, 2015, 02:19 PM: Message edited by: OrneryMod ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
What I meant King Al, was that Kate argues with persuasive facts while others say things like "My thesis is that people with your thesis are reacting emotionally" which accomplish nothing other than confirming the speaker's smugness. Glad you have kept your sense of humor, though.
Facts are pretty much the same thing as opinions around here, neh? Facts are used either to inform or disinform, and arguments based on facts whether presented or inferred are used to explain or persuade. A well-reasoned opinion uses facts and in some senses are more "reliable" than the mass of facts from which they are formed.

[ November 21, 2015, 09:34 AM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Easily available information", my arse, TomDavidson! I had to click on links and read things and copy and paste and everything!
Posts: 2635 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
Also, Raf, you responded to Kate, who has never, in my recollection, pitched anything like a tantrum. She posted a Link to a very fiscally and socially conservative think tank, the Cato institute.

Actually, I did not respond to her with that. I believe all the third grade antics going on here have confused you and the situation. If only there was some type of moderation .... [Roll Eyes]
Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I agree that you did not respond to what she said, which is why what you said was so inappropriate when you posted it as a repose to her post, including her link.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:

I am asking you to not be a stupid dick. You consider that abuse?

So does the Oxford English dictionary, you poor over Americanized hyperbole. Do you need a cut and paste?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am amused that Tom takes issue with the word "abusing" but neither denies nor contests that his obsessive posts to me on this thread are *sadomasochistic*
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I reject the idea that I need to address every point on which we disagree. When you lapse into sex talk, I generally decline to engage you on it.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Which is one of the principal reasons I engage in sex talk. But sadomasochism's association with sex is orthogonal at best.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If I wanted to reference sexual kinkiness rather than the aggression born of projected self hatred, I would have said "Dominance/submission" rather than sadomasochism.

Setting exact terms aside, you recognize that the way you have engaged me on this thread is not healthy, neh?

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Actually, I think it's a lot healthier than the usual dance, Pete.

Your typical mechanisms here aren't viable, and I have long put up with them out of a general desire for decorum. But I think this is really just enabling you, and you need a firmer hand. I don't think being gentle with you has helped. [Frown]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
When Syrian refugees were asked to list the greatest threat, 29 percent picked Iran, 22 percent picked Israel and 19 percent picked America. Only 10 percent viewed Islamic terrorism as a great threat.

Thirty-seven percent of Syrian refugees oppose US airstrikes on ISIS. 33% oppose the objective of destroying ISIS.

So, yeah. Let's get these guys loaded up in America. What could possibly go wrong with brining in thousands of people that see you as the greatest threat and oppose any actions against the worst terrorist organization in the world?
Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Thirty-seven percent of Syrian refugees oppose US airstrikes on ISIS. "

If you had friends and family in ISIS territory might you be concerned with Air strikes?

My grandfather was captured at the battle of the bulge. He got sore when US airstrikes hit his concentration camp. He never forgave the US air force. And yet he went on to serve the US in Korea, and retired a lt colonel. Disliking airstrikes doesn't make you a security threat.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
Actually, I think it's a lot healthier than the usual dance, Pete.

Your typical mechanisms here aren't viable, and I have long put up with them out of a general desire for decorum. But I think this is really just enabling you, and you need a firmer hand. I don't think being gentle with you has helped. [Frown]

Dandy. Aside from your wildly inappropriate homoerotic "firm hand" banter [Frown] , I much prefer your middle school hysterics to the smug phony "politeness" of the last 14 years. As a bonus, your present routine means ornery a break from you every few days. Just keep an eye on your blood pressure, old boy.

++++++++

Edited to add, if OM is reading this, please don't let Tom goad you into banning him for over two weeks at a time. When you do that, he runs to Mrs Card and gets you replaced.

[ December 01, 2015, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Also, Raf, you realize we can pick and choose which refugees to take, right?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"please, feel free to identify one Mosque in the US which enforces this in any way."

Ah. So people actually murdered for apostasy or blasphemy don't count unless sentence is carried out by a mosque?

Doublethink, Pyr. Please don't go off rattling off irrelevant martial law codes that were written while Moses had Israel wandering, unless you believe that a significant number of Christians actually stone folks that gather stocks on the Sabbath. Or if you missed Jesus'defense of the woman taken in adultery.

Missionaries, even in the USA, fear approaching Muslims. Muslim converts to Christianity fear for their lives and their families. Christians who convert to Judaism or become Atheism, have no such fears here.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
Also, Raf, you realize we can pick and choose which refugees to take, right?

Sure can!

quote:
The woman who took part in the ISIS-inspired San Bernardino massacre is linked to her native country's most notorious radical mosque, American officials believe.
Sources have told Daily Mail Online that US officials handed over information to their Pakistani counterparts about links between Tashfeen Malik and the Red Mosque in Islamabad.

The mosque is infamous for its links to violence and authorities in Pakistan are now considering taking action against its preacher, Maulana Abdul Aziz, after the disclosures by US officials.

CBS reports that Malik passed DHS screening for counterterrorism as part of the vetting for her visa.

Pick and choose, alright. Tell me, why should we assume they're going to do better? Or, was this a intentional pick by the government?

Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ah, a conspiracy! Tell us why...?
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rafi, tell us all the difference between the screening for someone coming in as a fiancé of a US citizen vs the screening for someone coming in as a refugee.

But I am sure you don't know that there is a difference. So look it up. Summarize the salient differences. Then try to make your point again.

Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Greg, you provide the info for your own points yourself. If you have some belief that the DHS will not handle counterterrorism screening and another agency that does a better job will, then by all means sum it up for us. Look it up, give us alla link, then try to actually make a point about it rather than whatever that was you did. I'm sure you have it right at your fingertips ...

My point, that counterterror screening is failing, has been all too tragically made and proven.

Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And just as I hit add reply, proven again:
quote:
A man was stabbed in the ticket hall at Leytonstone station this evening by another man who witnesses say shouted "This is for Syria" as he slashed his throat.
Another three are thought to have been injured.

The Met Police said its counter-terrorism command unit is now investigating the incident.

US and UK, the screening sucks and people are dying.
Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What do you want to do about it?
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This tweet by Evitri Payet captures the liberal denial so perfectly:
quote:
Horrifying what's happened at Leytonstone.

There's a guy shouting at him "you're not muslim" so so true No religion promotes this nonsense

Yeah man, no true Scotsman....er, I mean, Muslim would do that!
Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The point is that they can't screen for what is in someone's mind.

So there is no way to stop someone with no record from getting in when their first and only act of terrorism is intended to be their last act on this Earth.

That's why all of this nonsense about the how effective screening is going to be is just a bad joke.

Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So you might as well let everybody in, I guess, since people here are at least as deadly as people that want to come here.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So if there are pitbulls running loose around the neighborhood mauling people to death already then we may as well set more loose?

Or maybe we've got enough violence on our plate already so we don't need another helping of it.

Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Maybe the problem we should solve is violence, instead of over-reacting to the minuscule number of refugees who have been part of the problem. Syed Farook was born and raised in the US. I would call him a home-grown terrorist. His wife came here perfectly legally after extensive vetting, so we know that no vetting process can completely eliminate potential or future threats. Condoleezza Rice and every other senior member of Bush's WH said the same thing, and of the 750,000 refugees we let in after that only 3 were found to be terrorist plotters.

What do you want to do? Rafi G can't muster the effort to explain how to solve the problem, but maybe you can.

[ December 05, 2015, 09:28 PM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rafi, your assertion is that "counterterror screening is failing" - for that to be a valid statement requires that the screening for a fiance is identical to other forms of counterterror screening (as in that for a refugee).

Not my job to substantiate your assertions, just my perogative to point out that you haven't done so.

Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Resettle the refugees in parts of their own countries that are safest. If necessary send it a UN force to establish these safe zones. Also resettle Muslim refugees into other Muslim countries. Let the non-Muslim ones come here and to Europe or where ever they please since they will face persecution in Muslim countries.

You can say there have been few terrorist Muslim attacks but how many of the non-Muslim refugees or immigrants have carried out terrorist attacks? None is better than few.

Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The screening for the fiance was more thorough than refugee screening. And it still failed.
Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The screening for the fiance was more thorough than refugee screening.
Cherry, go back and do your homework, because you are wrong. If you disagree, then substantiate your assertion
Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The screening for the fiance was able to use records from an intact government that was not in the middle of a civil war. It found nothing because there was nothing to find, and not in the same way there will be nothing to find in Syria. She was a good girl so there were no criminal records on her and no ties to radicals. She must have been at least well to do since her family had a maid.

How can the screening of Syrian refugees be more thorough when they are few if any records to check against?

Why don't you back up your assertion that refugee screening will be more thorough?

People can be radicals intent on causing harm without there being any record of it anywhere and no where or way for law enforcement to make the connection. This is because radicalization occurs in the mind and unless you can read their mind you will have no idea. And even more difficult, actually impossible, is to screen anyone for what is going to be in their mind once they get here.

If it sounds like I'm saying it's impossible to screen them to prevent this type of attack from happening again, that's exactly what I'm saying.

And everyone acknowledges this. No one disagrees. The only disagreement is that some people say it's worth bringing them here even though we can be sure some may engage in this type of terrorist attack and others say it's not worth it.

Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1