The USA Political Thread

[lennco]

Here you can spout your USA political views.

Rules:
1. Keep it clean
2. No fighting
3. Respect the views of others.
4. US Political views, No Religious views
5. Have fun

:wave:

 

[verbster]

This story is about John Balyo, who allegedly paid 41-year-old Ronald Lee Moser of Battle Creek who operated a website that offered customers sex with underage boys for a fee.

Not sure how you link this to being "Terrorism".

Pedophile or gay, yes, but terrorism?

In my opinion under age boys being offered on a website for sex by a man of the church supposed to protect them is a form of terrorism. Think about what kind of terror those kids went through.

 

[verbster]

Just call them the Wash Skins and the "non existent problem, except in the mind of some Looney Liberals" is solved

By "Looney Liberals" do you mean the Native Americans supporting this change?

 

[GILSAN]

By "Looney Liberals" do you mean the Native Americans supporting this change?

No, not the Native Americans. I repeat once again.... it's the "Looney Liberals" who are making a mountain out of a molehill of this story

Have a look at this article:

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/10/08/how-many-native-americans-think-redskins-is-a-slur/

Here are a couple of excerpts:

"There are Native American schools that call their teams Redskins. The term is used affectionately by some natives, similar to the way the N-word is used by some African-Americans. In the only recent poll to ask native people about the subject, 90 percent of respondents did not consider the term offensive"

“We just don’t think that (name) is an issue,” Yazzie said. “There are more important things like busing our kids to school, the water settlement, the land quality, the air that surrounds us. Those are issues we can take sides on.”

 

[RogueWriter]

I suppose if you listed out the grievances the Native American population has, illiteracy, poverty, etc., the name of a football team beats them all out.

According to Webster:

ter·ror·ism
noun \ˈter-ər-ˌi-zəm\
: the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal.

I don't think that specific term applies. But, that low life scum could certainly use a daily water boarding for the rest of his miserable life.

 

[GILSAN]

In my opinion under age boys being offered on a website for sex is a form of terrorism

OK, that I agree with you wholeheartedly, but... you said:

by a man of the church supposed to protect them is a form of terrorism. Think about what kind of terror those kids went through.

But the article says differently:

Balyo is accused of being a customer, said Chris Johnson, a Cooley Law School professor and human trafficking expert.

"I think the terminology would be a 'John' — that in itself is not going to be human trafficking," said Johnson. "The person he went to in order to secure the child would be the one who would be guilty of human trafficking."

Federal and state agents say that person is 41-year-old Ronald Lee Moser of Battle Creek, Mich. He ran a website offering paying customers sex with underage boys.

 

[RogueWriter]

Came across an interesting chart:

 

[Domainace]

Love this joke. My liberal friends think its funny, too. But two minutes later, they're talking about how the government needs to do more. I envy that ability to disconnect.

Once upon a time the government had a vast scrap yard in the middle of a desert. Congress said, "someone may steal from it at night.." So they created a night watchman position and hired a person for the job...

Then Congress said, "How does the watchman do his job without
instruction?" So they created a planning department and hired two
people, one person to write the instructions, and one person to do time
studies.

Then Congress said, "How will we know the night watchman is doing
The tasks correctly?" So they created a Quality Control department and
hired two people. One to do the studies and one to write the reports.

Then Congress said, "How are these people going to get paid?" So
They created the following positions, a time keeper, and a payroll officer,
Then hired two people.

Then Congress said, "Who will be accountable for all of these
people?" So they created an administrative section and hired three people, an Administrative Officer, Assistant Administrative Officer, and a Legal Secretary.

Then Congress said, "We have had this command in operation for one
Year and we are $18,000 over budget, we must cutback overall cost."

So they laid off the night watchman.

 

[JB Lions]

"There are Native American schools that call their teams Redskins. The term is used affectionately by some natives, similar to the way the N-word is used by some African-Americans."

Hold up.

So if those are on the same level.

Then Washington Redskins would be about the same as Washington Ni***s ?

 

[verbster]

No, not the Native Americans. I repeat once again.... it's the "Looney Liberals" who are making a mountain out of a molehill of this story

No. it's the Oneida Indian nation. I suppose the people who support them are the "Looney Liberals" you mock.

Have a look at this article:

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/10/08/how-many-native-americans-think-redskins-is-a-slur/

Here are a couple of excerpts:

"There are Native American schools that call their teams Redskins. The term is used affectionately by some natives, similar to the way the N-word is used by some African-Americans. In the only recent poll to ask native people about the subject, 90 percent of respondents did not consider the term offensive"

“We just don’t think that (name) is an issue,” Yazzie said. “There are more important things like busing our kids to school, the water settlement, the land quality, the air that surrounds us. Those are issues we can take sides on.”

I see it differently. As in anything, you can find people who claim allegiance to whichever side you like. You use the "N-word" as an example of how it's now considered a "term of affection" when the word is so taboo that you and the reporter writing the story about how it's a term of affection can't even use it. Worse yet, just like "Redskins," neither word has equal opportunity use by different heritage, and that causes ugliness if someone forces it: “Of course, it is one thing for one ‘skin to call another ‘skin a ‘skin, but it has entirely different meaning when a non-Indian uses it,” Meland said in an email interview. That tells me there is a big problem. I don't think you're going to see the Nebraska Nazis anytime soon, or the Kansas Kikes. But according to your argument, if I take a poll and find an old group of Germans that say they see nothing wrong with the Nazi term, then it's okay to use. The Ohio Ovens? I don't have to look far to find people who don't even believe it happened, so to find a group that doesn't mind "Redskins" being used doesn't convince me of much,

 

[verbster]

I suppose if you listed out the grievances the Native American population has, illiteracy, poverty, etc., the name of a football team beats them all out.

According to Webster:

ter·ror·ism
noun \ˈter-ər-ˌi-zəm\
: the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal.

I don't think that specific term applies. But, that low life scum could certainly use a daily water boarding for the rest of his miserable life.

I don't think terrorism has an accepted international legal definition. My personal definition defines the use of terror as terrorism. And no, I'm not talking about scary movies, but it would include bullying and gangs. A political goal is not necessary. Some people just enjoy the feeling of being able to hack someone's head off.

 

[verbster]

OK, that I agree with you wholeheartedly, but... you said:



But the article says differently:

Balyo is accused of being a customer, said Chris Johnson, a Cooley Law School professor and human trafficking expert.

"I think the terminology would be a 'John' — that in itself is not going to be human trafficking," said Johnson. "The person he went to in order to secure the child would be the one who would be guilty of human trafficking."

Federal and state agents say that person is 41-year-old Ronald Lee Moser of Battle Creek, Mich. He ran a website offering paying customers sex with underage boys.

Yes, I presented it backwards. However, my point still applies, Maybe even more being that Balyo is the predator, the inflictor of pain and terror upon a defenseless kid. Put yourself in a ten year old's place and imagine how terrible it would be. To me, that's terrorism.

 

[Theo Goodman]

If the name is not such a big deal then just change it to the Washingtion Cracker Jacks and be done with it. All the new media attention and new merch sales should make up for losing the old brand "Redskins". I can just hear it now:

Hail to the Crackers!


Hail, victory!


Crackers on the warpath!


Fight for Old D.C.!

 

[verbster]

If the name is not such a big deal then just change it to the Washingtion Cracker Jacks and be done with it. All the new media attention and new merch sales should make up for losing the old brand "Redskins". I can just hear it now:
Hail to the Crackers!

Hail, victory!

Crackers on the warpath!

Fight for Old D.C.!

To the owners of the team the name is a huge deal. To change names will cost quite a bit and have many legal repercussions.

 

[GILSAN]

No. it's the Oneida Indian nation. I suppose the people who support them are the "Looney Liberals" you mock.


I see it differently. As in anything, you can find people who claim allegiance to whichever side you like. You use the "N-word" as an example of how it's now considered a "term of affection" when the word is so taboo that you and the reporter writing the story about how it's a term of affection can't even use it. Worse yet, just like "Redskins," neither word has equal opportunity use by different heritage, and that causes ugliness if someone forces it: “Of course, it is one thing for one ‘skin to call another ‘skin a ‘skin, but it has entirely different meaning when a non-Indian uses it,” Meland said in an email interview. That tells me there is a big problem. I don't think you're going to see the Nebraska Nazis anytime soon, or the Kansas Kikes. But according to your argument, if I take a poll and find an old group of Germans that say they see nothing wrong with the Nazi term, then it's okay to use. The Ohio Ovens? I don't have to look far to find people who don't even believe it happened, so to find a group that doesn't mind "Redskins" being used doesn't convince me of much,

I use the N-word? That's a quote from the article.

Hey Verbster, you really are a confusing character. You talk about Nebraska Nazis, Kansas Kikes, Ohio Ovens, one ‘skin to call another ‘skin a ‘skin is OK, but the reverse is not. WTF are you talking about?

To quote Winston Churchill, you, Verbster are a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.

In other words... you make no sense at all.

Why not call them the Washington Palefaces, or the Washington Crackers. That way all the Looney Liberals would be happy.

 

[GILSAN]

Yes, I presented it backwards. However, my point still applies, Maybe even more being that Balyo is the predator, the inflictor of pain and terror upon a defenseless kid. Put yourself in a ten year old's place and imagine how terrible it would be. To me, that's terrorism.

You present it backwards and it has the same meaning? The only point you were trying to make is that Balyo is a Christian man of the church who is probably a pedophile or a gay who likes young boys, yet you fail to mention the guy who offers these young boys in his website for sale. Seems like he's not a terrorist to you.

The point you were trying to make was possibly as a counter-reply to my post #2270 where I mention
"Brigitte Gabriel gives FANTASTIC answer to Muslim woman claiming all Muslims are portrayed badly"

I've said before and I'll say it again. I have ZERO tolerance for Pedophiles, weather they are Catholic priests, or from any other religion, that like young boys.

I also have ZERO tolerance for Gay Catholic priests who go after young boys.

I also have ZERO tolerance for pimps that sell underage boys and girls for sex

In fact I have ZERO tolerance for all forms human trafficking, especially of young boys and girls.

But you Verbster, seem to only have ZERO tolerance towards Christians. You've proved that here time and time again. Never once have you criticized anything the religion of peace does, but you're always fast off tracks to criticize Christians

 

[Theo Goodman]

This is so much beyond democrat vs. republican:

 

[GILSAN]

This is so much beyond democrat vs. republican:

Good Video

 

[verbster]

You present it backwards and it has the same meaning? The only point you were trying to make is that Balyo is a Christian man of the church who is probably a pedophile or a gay who likes young boys, yet you fail to mention the guy who offers these young boys in his website for sale. Seems like he's not a terrorist to you.

The point I was trying to make was that terrorism and terrorists come in many shapes and forms. Muslim and Christian, car bombs and child rapists. They're all slugs, including the website owner.

But you Verbster, seem to only have ZERO tolerance towards Christians. You've proved that here time and time again. Never once have you criticized anything the religion of peace does, but you're always fast off tracks to criticize Christians.

Take a religious chill pill, Gilsan. You seem to think that because I don't bash Muslims in every post like you do that I don't find Muslim terrorists reprehensible. I do, but that simply goes without having to say it every post.

if you check, you'll find that I mainly have issues with the biased and often untruthful ways posts are presented. That's what I take issue with. You call it defending the "religion of peace," but I look at it as simply pointing out the arrogant nonsense any religion offers when they act like my-religion-is better-than-yours.

 

[verbster]

I use the N-word? That's a quote from the article.

Hey Verbster, you really are a confusing character. You talk about Nebraska Nazis, Kansas Kikes, Ohio Ovens, one ‘skin to call another ‘skin a ‘skin is OK, but the reverse is not. WTF are you talking about?

To quote Winston Churchill, you, Verbster are a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.

In other words... you make no sense at all.

Why not call them the Washington Palefaces, or the Washington Crackers. That way all the Looney Liberals would be happy.

You're trying to defend the use of "Redskins" by finding a few groups of Native Americans who say that it doesn't bother them. However, the article you used also contains the quote that says it's okay for some Indians to use it with each other, but it wouldn't be a good idea for a non-Native to use it. Same thing with the "N-word". . . I mean, jeez, the author couldn't even say the word. That says it all.

The reference to the Holocaust and Nazis was trying to show you that even though some people can be found that say they don't have a problem with those terms, that doesn't make it okay to use them. Just like it's not okay to use "Redskins".

I don't understand why you think using any derogatory names would be okay. Sometimes a descriptor is useful, but to consistently refer to any group with descriptions meant to be ugly, even minor stuff like "Looney Liberals" starts to chafe after a while.

 

[GILSAN]

BTW here's a bit of advice if you ever meet a Muslim for the first time. If you want to shake hands with a Muslim, use your left hand. They never use their right as they would be insulted if you ever used your right hand in front of them. I know the reason why, and it's a pretty disgusting reason.

So don't come here and compare Christians and the Religion of Peace, or try to put them in the same bag.

About 2 weeks ago I wrote "Allahu Akbar" in response to someone's post on the STS thread. You immediately wrote a post in the religious thread, were you said:

"Gilsan, Were you actually intending to insult the complete Islamic religion (in the formerly titled Johname and friends section),with your "Allahu Akbar" comment? Or was that your idea of a joke?"

Interesting that until very recently DU had a with an image of a penguin dressed as the Pope, which didn't bother you (didn't bother me either) or just yesterday a picture was put up in the STS thread showing a World Cup Columbian fan dressed as the Pope with swastikas and Cannabis leaves all over. That doesn't seem to bother you either (me neither)

Isn't that an insult to the Pope and the Catholic Church? Why didn't you question that and the picture, as you did when I said Allahu Akbar?

The point I was trying to make was that terrorism and terrorists come in many shapes and forms. Muslim and Christian, car bombs and child rapists. They're all slugs, including the website owner.



Take a religious chill pill, Gilsan. You seem to think that because I don't bash Muslims in every post like you do that I don't find Muslim terrorists reprehensible. I do, but that simply goes without having to say it every post.

if you check, you'll find that I mainly have issues with the biased and often untruthful ways posts are presented. That's what I take issue with. You call it defending the "religion of peace," but I look at it as simply pointing out the arrogant nonsense any religion offers when they act like my-religion-is better-than-yours.

 

[verbster]

BTW here's a bit of advice if you ever meet a Muslim for the first time. If you want to shake hands with a Muslim, use your left hand. They never use their right as they would be insulted if you ever used your right hand in front of them. I know the reason why, and it's a pretty disgusting reason.

You've got it backwards. The left hand is used to clean your butt. Using it in a social situation, especially to shake hands, is an insult. [/QUOTE]

So don't come here and compare Christians and the Religion of Peace, or try to put them in the same bag.

I'll do whatever I want.

About 2 weeks ago I wrote "Allahu Akbar" in response to someone's post on the STS thread. You immediately wrote a post in the religious thread, were you said:

"Gilsan, Were you actually intending to insult the complete Islamic religion (in the formerly titled Johname and friends section),with your "Allahu Akbar" comment? Or was that your idea of a joke?"

You took a totally non-religious cartoon about viewing the butts instead of faces at Mt. Rushmore, and turned it into an insult against a religion for no reason.

Interesting that until very recently DU had a with an image of a penguin dressed as the Pope, which didn't bother you (didn't bother me either) or just yesterday a picture was put up in the STS thread showing a World Cup Columbian fan dressed as the Pope with swastikas and Cannabis leaves all over. That doesn't seem to bother you either (me neither)

Isn't that an insult to the Pope and the Catholic Church? Why didn't you question that and the picture, as you did when I said Allahu Akbar?

That's like asking me why I don't chase down every bad driver I see.

A week or so ago, in Dawg's blog, he wrote, "And here is the pope of the catholic church who is helping with the coming end times! Yes, prophecy is coming clear with this liberal/commie heading the church. Do not pray for this spawn of satan, or anyone else in the vatican. Instead pray for the people who still believe in Christ and the catholic church."

I didn't say anything about that one either, but I should have, not because of an insult to the Pope -- he has our constitutional right to freedom of speech -- but because his "About" describes himself as, "Just a tiny bit right of center," which his blogs clearly demonstrate he's much more than a tiny bit right of center.

 

[GILSAN]

Something wrong here: My previous post is incomplete and not showing the first half of it. But I'll answer about Muslims NOT using their right hand to greet you and your reply to it:

"You've got it backwards. The left hand is used to clean your butt. Using it in a social situation, especially to shake hands, is an insult."

I don't have it backwards. Muslims do it on purpose to non-Muslims. They would never do that to a Muslim as that would be an insult to greet their own with the hand that that cleans their butt.

This in itself shows exactly what they think of non-Muslims. They despise and look down on us to the point where they greet us with the hand that cleans their butt.

And why don't they clean their butts with toilet paper?

Because it's against their religion

I will later post the part that for some strange reason was omitted from my previous post

 

[verbster]

I don't have it backwards. Muslims do it on purpose to non-Muslims.

In the three years I lived and worked in the Gulf (during the time of Shield and Storm), not once did a Muslim try to shake hands with me by offering his left hand. Maybe it's different in Madeira Island.

This in itself shows exactly what they think of non-Muslims. They despise and look down on us to the point where they greet us with the hand that cleans their butt.

Who do you mean by "us"? You need to stop feeding on your own vitriolic nonsense.

And why don't they clean their butts with toilet paper? Because it's against their religion

They believe using water makes them cleaner. Sort of the reason many southern Europeans use bidets . . . you know, that other toilet-looking thing that's used for cleaning a person's nether regions.
.

I will later post the part that for some strange reason was omitted from my previous post

Are you sure you want to post more about this? I don't.

 

[GILSAN]

They believe using water makes them cleaner. Sort of the reason many southern Europeans use bidets . . . you know, that other toilet-looking thing that's used for cleaning a person's nether regions.

Have you ever used a toilet in a Muslim country? Pretty disgusting. Don't they take a daily bath? European women, not men, use bidets, but every Muslim, men and women has clean their butts with their left hands, otherwise....

 

[GILSAN]

Something wrong with Namepros posts. Once again I posted a much longer post than what is shown above, but only one paragraph shows up.