They Caught The Times Square Bomber

[AvalonXQ]

Look you object to the mere mentioning of the candidate you voted for positions. Why? I did not originally make any claim that you believed it, you just love to be a jerk so much that you really can't help yourself.

Are we still on this?
How many more pages of ponderingturtle acting like DR has said, defended, or believes a position that he as consistently been against are we going to have? Is it just that ponderingturtle can't stand having been called on it and is therefore refusing to back down about it?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Are we still on this?
How many more pages of ponderingturtle acting like DR has said, defended, or believes a position that he as consistently been against are we going to have? Is it just that ponderingturtle can't stand having been called on it and is therefore refusing to back down about it?

And I never said he believed it. He just discounted the existence, to he thinks his own candidates are marginalized nutbags who can safely be ignored from any debate on these issues.

 

[AvalonXQ]

And I never said he believed it. He just discounted the existence,

He never discounted the existence at all. His response to McCain's quote was to ask for a citation, indicate that he disagreed with McCain, and then respond to your implication that he agreed with the position he adamantly disagreed with.
Again, you're mischaracterizing DR. It's what you've been doing the whole time. I don't know if it's willful or not.

 

[ponderingturtle]

He never discounted the existence at all.

Bull, his first post and his reaction to mine show that he doesn't think that it is a point of view that has any merits to even admit exist.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Bull, his first post and his reaction to mine show that he doesn't think that it is a point of view that has any merits to even admit exist.

Absolutely wrong. From the very beginning he objected to you trying to paint him as having this position. You continue to misrepresent his statements. How much longer will you do so?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Absolutely wrong. From the very beginning he objected to you trying to paint him as having this position. You continue to misrepresent his statements. How much longer will you do so?

Then why did he take so much issue when I pointed out that people don't agree with his idea that just because he didn't have his Mirranda rights read to him that he must be let go? We have had people in prison now who had their mirranda right violated for over a year(see José Padilla and how he had his right to an lawyer violated for well over a year).

He ignored that whole debate and decided to be a total jerk when the mere idea that people might hold different views on rights gets so much derision?

Then of course the man he wanted to be president showed how common this view is.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Then of course the man he wanted to be president showed how common this view is.

There it is again.
Your entire focus in this thread is to try to imply that DR supports the very idea DR opposes.
And you just can't get away from it. It's remarkably dishonest. It's disgusting.

 

[ponderingturtle]

There it is again.
Your entire focus in this thread is to try to imply that DR supports the very idea DR opposes.
And you just can't get away from it. It's remarkably dishonest. It's disgusting.

I meant exactly what I said. He supports those who support these ideas. He might not support them in this, but he does support them and think they should be making these kind of decisions.

 

[Darth Rotor]

I meant exactly what I said.

Seems an honest statement.

He supports those who support these ideas. He might not support them in this, but he does support them and think they should be making these kind of decisions.

Your powers of mind reading are not believed. I hear this is a skeptics' board.

Your extended attempt to speak for me is part of what I have been pointing out to you, with some irritation, as both rude and dishonest.

Look at my post count, PT. I can speak for myself, thanks.

Now, let us end this bickering, and get back to bombers.

DR

 

[ponderingturtle]

Seems an honest statement.

Your powers of mind reading are not believed. I hear this is a skeptics' board.

Your extended attempt to speak for me is part of what I have been pointing out to you, with some irritation, as both rude and dishonest.

Your support is a matter of record. How much do you have to redefine things such that voting for someone doesn't count as support.

Look at my post count, PT. I can speak for myself, thanks.

Now, let us end this bickering, and get back to bombers.

DR

Yes you are not worth listening to because you can't take pedantic correction, and I am unable to not pedantically correct someone. So welcome to ignore.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Yes you are not worth listening to because you can't take pedantic correction, and I am unable to not pedantically correct someone. So welcome to ignore.

Great. Hopefully that will be the end of it.
And if not responding to Darth means fewer of your inanities in general, all the better.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Your support is a matter of record. How much do you have to redefine things such that voting for someone doesn't count as support.

Your all or nothing fallacy is noted.

Yes you are not worth listening to because you can't take pedantic correction, and I am unable to not pedantically correct someone. So welcome to ignore.

If by "pedantic correction" you mean attempting to put words in others' mouths -- not just me -- then yes.

Your penchant for playing games remains, so you are at least consistent. Credit where credit is due.

Cheers.

DR

 

[Skeptic]

Apparently, then, the one thing we shouldn't worry about after an Islamist terrorist tried to blow up Times Square is Islamic terrorism. Everything else, in particular those nasty conservatives doing unspeakable things, is a cause for worry.

 

[CORed]

Duplicate deleted.

 

[CORed]

Except that they don't.

But frankly, if they did, so?

If most terrorist attacks in the USA were carried out by extremist Jews, I, a Jew, certainly would think it's justifiable to answer a few more questions in an airline queue.

If Ugandans were behind most terrorist attacks in New York and Ugandan terrorist organizations openly declared war on the USA, I'd say Ugandans should be held up a bit more to make sure, too.

"Racial profiling" apparently is something you consider far worse than the terrorist attacks themselves, which is absurd.

The problem with racial profiling is that at some point, we may have to deal with terrorists who aren't idiots (unlike the Times Square bomber and his "support network"). If we only check Arabs, or Pakistanis (or people who look like them), non-idiot terrorists might kidnap a lilly-white little old lady's grand children, fill her car up with high explosives and a radio detonator, and say "drive into Times Square (or other crowded location) or your grandkids are dead", knowing full well that nobody will look twice at her because she's not an Arab.

This is of course but one example of how a terrorist organization might coerce or co-opt somebody who doesn't fit the profile into doing their dirty work.

 

[carlitos]

One of the frustrations with the War on Terror thing is that we keep fighting the last battle.

9/11 = no boxcutters / fingernail files / butter knives
Richard Reid = shoes off at airplane security
Plot to blow up transcontinental flights = no liquids > 3 oz.

I mean, surely the terrorists are creative enough to think of the next thing, while we focus on the last thing. I think that the Israelis do a much better job, and I do not believe that they "racially" profile anyone.

 

[AvalonXQ]

The problem with racial profiling is that at some point, we may have to deal with terrorists who aren't idiots (unlike the Times Square bomber and his "support network"). If we only check Arabs,

I'll stop you right there.
Why assume that if we give closer scrutiny to a select group that fit a terrorist profile, we will also give less scrutiny than we currently do to everyone else?
To put it another way: what makes the hostage grandma situation more of a threat under the situation where we allow profiling, than it is now?
... as opposed to actual terrorist attacks, which have been consistently made by people who do fit the profile.

 

[Chaos]

One of the frustrations with the War on Terror thing is that we keep fighting the last battle.

9/11 = no boxcutters / fingernail files / butter knives
Richard Reid = shoes off at airplane security
Plot to blow up transcontinental flights = no liquids > 3 oz.

I mean, surely the terrorists are creative enough to think of the next thing, while we focus on the last thing. I think that the Israelis do a much better job, and I do not believe that they "racially" profile anyone.

Some day soon, some terrorist is going to cook up a plot to detonate his clothes, and those scaredy-cats in the US are gonna make us all fly naked from then on.

 

[WildCat]

Some day soon, some terrorist is going to cook up a plot to detonate his clothes, and those scaredy-cats in the US are gonna make us all fly naked from then on.

And in Germany, no doubt, you just walk right on a plane with whatever you like, no security check at all.

 

[carlitos]

Last time I flew out of Frankfurt, they swabbed my bag and put the swab into this giant machine, some kind of chromatography or spectrum analysis for explosives. It was pretty intimidating standing there waiting for the thing to spit out results, with the German guys with guns.