Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Luigi71585

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    An overly conservative state
  • Interests
    Computers, music, theology
  1. The abortion debate is old and tired. The fact is, you cannot talk someone into believing differently than how they feel. Especially if they are too closed-minded to listen. The fact of the matter is no one here, regardless of how pompous they are, knows if an embryo is "human" or not. So in that sense, it doesnt matter. Since there is no point trying to prove my feelings on this, I will just state my opinion in support. Just because you say that it doesnt behave like a human doesnt mean isnt. You say it cant express itself like a human being. In that sense, neither can babies. They can express themselves in very limited ways. Are babies non-human? What of people with mental disabilities? They also cannot express themselves in anything other than the most basic of emotions. Are they un-human? I think not. I believe differently than alot of people do on some STRONG issues. Rightfully so. Without seeing another point, you no longer grow or learn. But with all thats in me, i cannot see condoning the "extermination" of something that is/could become fully human. Ive tried seeing both sides, but cannot. Why cant we give the babies up for adotion? Someone will say that its a problem for the unwed mothers or what not. Well what about the future human that was cut short? Was it not a problem? An inconvience to be denied life? Wheres the choice for the definite future human? Pro-"Choice" says that theyre not human so its not wrong. Ok. I see your point and understand where youre coming from. But what if youre wrong? What if were committing murder on our own species? What if were tiny Hitlers killing what we consider "inferior" or "un-human" just as he did the jews? Not a transfer, just a thought. Ah well, whatever. Im sure there'll be attacks against this and rightfully so. Just try and see someone elses side. I have. Thanks.
  2. I wouldve thoguht that the numbers were specifically important here because there was moderate amounts before and enormous after. we should know better than to say say 1 before 17 after blah blah, but here you are: The council on foreign relations sites an amount of 28 in the year 2000 to 481 after 9/11. I might add that these attacks were considered beyond verbal because basic phone threats come in on a daily basis, says Majed Dabdoub, president of a major Islamic group in America. These are the numbers. They are a substantial amount. Granted, theyre not as high as normal race/religion hate crime numbers. The reason for this is that this is a new found hatred (28) and the others have deep seated places in our society. The qestion to ask yourself is why did these numbers rise? Because we have this new-found hatred in America. A simple point blown way out of proportion. Hopefully we can return the the issue at hand-Yee and al-Halabi. Thanks once again for the input. Source
  3. Id like to know where you get your figures Mr Farrius. A 600 on the SATs. That sounds pretty measly doesnt it? Well thats because its A LIE. If you can prove me wrong ill be glad to accept it, but i have this LEGIT figure that says he got a 1206 on the SATs (verbal: 566; math: 640). This is by no means top of the liter, but it a'int bad at all. Its more than twice as much as what youre posting. I usually hate whining about lies this and lies that, but thats insane! A 600!? You cant just make up figures man, especially when trying to prove that youre NOT LYING! Salon Politics Figures
  4. Boydfish, im sincerely dounting that paying african americans equal wages is going to turn us into the Soviet union. Back a statement like that with some proof for gods sake. What are you saying here? That one race is more suited to certain professions than others!? Unless a race is gifted with managerial skills they shouldnt be??? This sounds like youre aplpying manifest destiny to race in the workforce. Rethink/rephrase that statement. It may not have meant this, but were talking about race so Rethink/rephrase that statement. Thanks for the input and reasonable debate.
  5. Wow. Its almost a full fledged conspiracy! Haha. Havent had a good one in a while. Thanks Nova. The 1600% was a fact, check the link. Its based on a Ball State University Study (Government sanctioned and approved may i add) so its verifiable. As to the argument about the percentage and numbers, lets all be adult and not play assannign. We know that these are significant numbers. Even if it was one before and 1600 after thats about 1600 more than it should be. Verbal attacks are no longer important eh? Attcks verbally arent considered "hate crimes" now? Odd coming out of a country wholl soon put a priest in jail for speaking about about homosexuals (haha thanks hugo). I consider verbal assults as bad as the next. I dont know why it should matter one way or another. A verbal attack is hatred. Its a HATE crime for Gods sake! Ive said before and ill say it again: There is hate for islam, pure and simple. Its not justified but it exists. My point in all this is that Yee and now Ahmad I. al-Halabi have aligned themselves with something Americans HATE. Not necessarily gonna get them hissed at on the street. But as soon as the crossed the lines and began working with KNOWN ISLAMIC ENEMIES, people are going to hate them as well. You dont see a Cathol killing protestants in this war. Why? because our enemy is Iraq and some faction of islam. My feeling is that we need to understand our enemy because to quote Nova, but sympathizing with them, as Yee and al-Halabi have done is over the line. Its dangerous to America, hence the "conspiracy" or what have you. Our bases couldve lost serious security because of them and potentially gotten more people killed in the act. Over the line. Unforgivable. Thanks for the Military info. found it informative.
  6. Listen Boyd. Im not a big fan of AA, but I am a fan of equality. I still hold that AA seperates, not unites. The simple fatc is, in the eyes of society and polotics, we ARE all equal. We all should have equality in the job market and in all facets of life. I just dont feel that AA accomplishes this. And as for this argument, id have to say that that sounds a literal intolerant. Borderline racist. Why would we not want equal pay for equal work? No ones suggesting that the mail room clerk be paid equal to the high-steel worker. But a black steel worker and white steel worker SHOULD be paid the same. Simple and true. To deny this is ludicrous. Once again DEREK, i have provided you ample information to either support your argument or deny theirs, depending on how you spin it. You want names!? These studies are based on actual people!! NOT a persons ideas! Why do you keep ignoring this? Maybe you have no real argument... The fact, ONCE AGAIN, is that whites have more jobs than blacks. Its on the facts. The odd thing is that the libs have been telling us that its like 90% more though. This is simply not true. Its closer to 12% more. Here its is again: Stats Try it out
  7. Hey FastNed. Hows it going. Haha. I will appreciate the future documentation, because the focus on Canadian security is relatively non-existent in the US. I havent heard a single fear expressed by any American, probably due to out lack of knowledge about such things. I dont doubt Canadas needs for safety within its own borders. The thing Im looking for is how it affects me here in the states and i dont believe that biometrics or canadian refugees are a fear. If they pass your inspection, im sure theyll pass ours. Also, im not saying you want to prove me wrong. Sorry, didnt mean it to come accross like that. What i mean is that i WANT to be proved wrong. I am the type that is interested in the things my government isnt telling me. Not to sound paranoid, but theres always more going on than what they make known. This is my odyssean quest so to speak. Any intelligent source on the "inside" such as yourself is the type of thing im looking for. I can say that because i appreciate you, nova and craigs postings most of all. They give me the insight i need to prove things here in real life.
  8. What has happened to this forum? Ever since real, undebatable facts were posted by yours truly no one seems to be able to make a point one way or another. Is this a conservative or liberal victory? I feel i have achieved a great victory. I killed a deabte by proving a point! This is like Vietnam but without the death and, this time, a victory for the home team. Please continue the debate.
  9. I would like to correct my last post. The Books are known as the Apocrafa and were added at the Nicene conference. This conference also drafted the Nicene Creed.
  10. Yeah i know. I come from this place i call reality. A place where things are real and factual. Not figures pulled out of our...heads. Didnt mean to throw the system you guys had where if you dont know someting you say, "I dont have time to find out that youre right!" LOL. Oh well, my strange foreign ways will never be understood. Oh and sarcasm is hard to detect in text form. I thougth i was being attacked! Do you guys actually find my links and sites informational or useful at all? Cause if not i wont waste my valuable time finding it to help the dabte. Input please.
  11. Hey derek, dont waste your time looking up Use the simple, easy to follow link on my previous post. Its factually based and impartial. A government study. Based on actual figures. My links are multipurpose and good for all! Thats what im here for.
  12. The books youre thinking of are the Nicean Books (Books of Tobit, 1st and 2nd Maccabee, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch) which are a Catholic addition to your "standard" bible. They were written approx. 100 years before Christ. These were added to the Catholic Bible at a convention in the past. The Orthadox Churches chose to disagree with this convention and when Luther left the Catholic Church, his bible also left these out. The controversy on these is whether ot not they were "inspired by God." No one doubts the truth or relevancy of thse books. The Book O' Mormon is a completely different book than the bible. According to Mormons the Book of Mormon is "another testiment of Jesus Christ." Its the story of the Gospel of Christ spreading from Israel to the americas. Created in the late 1800's when the Mormon Prophet Joseph Smith was visited by the angel Moroni. It tells the STORY of how Jesus visited the ancient indians tribes and blah, blah, blah. Basically to non-mormon religious folk, the book of mormon is a hoax. A made up story about jesus coming to america. This "revelation" came only after severe European colonization and missionary workings. Joseph Smith was a known "profit hound" and most non-mormons period believe it to be just that - a profit scam. Heres an interesting thought on Mormonism: Mormons call the "angel" Moroni the "angel of light." The bible refers to Lucifer (satan) as the Angel of light... interesting thought eh?
  13. Personal research shouldnt be necessary if a point is backed by logical proof instead of supossed personal opinion. Do appreciate the link. Thats the type of thing this site needs more of. This sentiment is backed by Greg who has asked for source citing. The only thing im missing in your research and my own is the proof that there is significant risk. I have done my own research and have yet to find anything signifying that there is risk from canada. I did however find that the real reason behind the biometrics decision was that the border security is too high. It is being implimented to help speed the Canadian/US traveler move back and forth between the 2 countries. In reality its not to increase our defenses, its to decrease the basic struggles of "safe" travelers. Its secondary feature is less exciting. Its for the security of goods. I think the simple fact thats its biometrics is causing it too be overglamourized. Prove me wrong. Source
  14. Also, i appreciate the researched intellgent debate from Krusty and FastNed. As a newbie to this particular forum and a veteran in others, i have been most impressed by you two. Nova makes good points, buts a little to abrasive for me. haha. In response to Krusty's post, the response of Islamics in America to the WAR, is almost non-existent. They have remained silent in this battle to neither raise hatred or respect. They did however raise enormous support for America in our campaign against Bin Laden. They main reason behind this was that they have always struggled to have our support after the original world trade attacks (use the link on my last post) and they stood firmly against the 9-11 attacks. Secondary, they were standing firmly behind their religion. Mohamed Magid (director of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society in Sterling, Va) said the Islamic culture in America was outraged because Bin Laden used the quran in his tapes. Thats a quote from Efreedomnews.com, a wonderful site to further your research on the Islmaic response in America. Once again thank you FastNed and Krusty for supporting my first thread in one way or another
  15. I believe i should restate myself. I got myself tangled. Undoubtedly there is hatred for our enemies in this war. I assume when i say "this country" we all know im speaking of the US. Forgive my brash response, but logically we have hatred of anything middle eastern in this country. Its a fact. Everywhere you turn someone is promoting tolerance to middle-easterners in America. You dont have to promote tolerance if people arent being intolerated. I was mistaken in saying it was Islam that we hate/fear. Its a culture we dont understand. The fact of the matter is that Yee CHOSE to be part of that culture and now we have reason to fear him. Where i was too extreme, FastNed is to low-key. Calling hatred of middle eastern societies "non-existent" makes no sense. What about the 1600%, thats a correct figure 1600%, increase in hate crimes towards Islamics after the attacks? How is that non-existent? Islamicity.com, a major Islam source withint he US reported similar figures. 1600%. Wow. If thats not sever hatred, please, tell me what is. As for the grenadier, I can only base what i know on what he said and what our military tells us. Basic rule of research - go to the primary source. Media falls in as a secondary, opinion based source. Some claim that Akbars attack was sugar coated to keep US citizens fear down and fully trust our soldiers. If this was the case, then why is the Yee case running so rampant? If viewed in this light, the grenade attack was nothing more than murder (as paradoxial as that sounds). The difference here IS that Yee is accused of terorism, thats a fact. Sgt. Akbar (grenadier) was only charged of premeditated murder. Yee was shown to be elusive in interogattion and silent when asked certain questions. If the FBI is involved, somethings going downtown. As for the UCMJ versus the BOQ, you have much more knowledge than I. I would appreciate any links or what not you can give me to help in my research on this topic. Thanks a bunch FastNed. Here are my sources: Hate crimes increase Total Story
  • Create New...