Remember me
▼ Content

Our Fragile Planet



Page 2 of 6<1234>>>
02-09-2019 19:23
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
Rallying supports is the point. It's not a video that was made for you of course.

IBdaMann wrote:Please cite where I favor banning Muslims.

TRUMP begins with: "I approve this message":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UoQff8MMVM
Big words on the screen
"TEMPORARY BAN ON MUSLIMS ENTERING THE US"

Your response was:
IBdaMann wrote:
Trump's message was one of security for the country, not one of racism and bigotry as the gullible have been tooled into regurgitating....Trump meant every word that got him elected. None of his supporters are denying what he said, only his detractors continue to this day to distort his message that still stands.

So I took that as YOU approve of that message.

I don't care if you pretend the words BAN and MUSLIM don't apply to the commercial. Because they do. You being crazy doesn't rob me of the ability to observe things which are factual.

Distorting the message yet again?


The Parrot Killer
02-09-2019 22:32
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
Your response was:
IBdaMann wrote:
.Trump meant every word that got him elected. None of his supporters are denying what he said, .
So I took that as YOU approve of that message.
You intentionally assigned a bogus position to me

Like I said bucko I can certainly assign to you the literal words printed on the screen of the message you endorse.
Into the Night wrote:
He's a damn fine President,

I know you're nuts and want some impossible version of reality where mutually exclusive truths coexist. But I'm not required to indulge your delusional thinking,
Edited on 02-09-2019 22:35
02-09-2019 22:43
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
I think you maybe forgot to quote them or link to the reference? Are you actually going to qualify some real work? Go for it : D
You go read up on them and their work yourself, lazy ass.

Oh so you were referencing everything ever written by how many people?

But nothing comes to mind you can quote. Because you can only be bothered to reply incessantly otherwise.

You've got so much spare time to quote me. Poor Planck just doesn't interest you enough.
02-09-2019 23:02
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4640)
tmiddles wrote:Like I said bucko I can certainly assign to you the literal words printed on the screen of the message you endorse.

You are a dishonest piece of chit. You claim that you can assign to me any position that was written somewhere if I mention that you are distorting the message.

Anyway, I will keep that under advisement. I suppose I should have known. You are, after all, a brain-dead Marxist who couldn't manage to eke out honesty if your life depended on it.

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
02-09-2019 23:37
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
IBdaMann wrote:You claim that you can assign to me any position that was written somewhere

Somewhere??? We discussed this focussed 30 second spot directly from TRUMP at length and I quoted you. You can claim it's something else but I'm free to call it was I like. I'm going with the words appearing on the screen. You approve "that" (scroll up page to image of actual undoctored video still). Done.
03-09-2019 04:36
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4640)
tmiddles wrote:You can claim it's something else but I'm free to call it was I like.

No, you do not get to assign any position to me that you like when it's not my position. Nonetheless, you crank out post after post mistating my position just because my view differs from your fanatical religious dogma.

The truth is that I have not encountered a single Marxist who is honest. You really are par for the course.

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
03-09-2019 11:50
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:You can claim it's something else but I'm free to call it was I like.

No, you do not get to assign any position to me that you like

I quote you IBD and without rewrites. My opinions and my words are clear to see for what they are. I think you're insane for example. You think I'm a Marxist. It's clear those our our opinions. You approve of Trumps message above as you so stated and were quoted. I read that message as planning a Ban on Muslims. So tough luck that's all perfectly honest and on the level.

HAD I misquoted you that wouldn't be cool and I wouldn't do that. I even try to take the time to link back to other topics if I'm quoting in one from another.

More importantly we're all here to speak for ourselves.
03-09-2019 20:07
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
Your response was:
IBdaMann wrote:
.Trump meant every word that got him elected. None of his supporters are denying what he said, .
So I took that as YOU approve of that message.
You intentionally assigned a bogus position to me

Like I said bucko I can certainly assign to you the literal words printed on the screen of the message you endorse.
Into the Night wrote:
He's a damn fine President,

I know you're nuts and want some impossible version of reality where mutually exclusive truths coexist. But I'm not required to indulge your delusional thinking,

Distorting the message yet again?


The Parrot Killer
03-09-2019 20:09
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
I think you maybe forgot to quote them or link to the reference? Are you actually going to qualify some real work? Go for it : D
You go read up on them and their work yourself, lazy ass.

Oh so you were referencing everything ever written by how many people?

No, YOU are. It is YOU that attempting to reference everything written by everyone. Inversion fallacy.
tmiddles wrote:
But nothing comes to mind you can quote. Because you can only be bothered to reply incessantly otherwise.

You've got so much spare time to quote me. Poor Planck just doesn't interest you enough.

I didn't think you would take the time to learn. You can't even take the time to read the textbooks you are quoting from.


The Parrot Killer
03-09-2019 20:15
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:You can claim it's something else but I'm free to call it was I like.

No, you do not get to assign any position to me that you like

I quote you IBD and without rewrites.

Lie. You are quoting a story that itself is a rewrite.
tmiddles wrote:
My opinions and my words are clear to see for what they are.

Yes they are. You are a Marxist.
tmiddles wrote:
I think you're insane for example.

YALIF.
tmiddles wrote:
You think I'm a Marxist.

So do I.
tmiddles wrote:
It's clear those our our opinions.

It is what you have demonstrated.
tmiddles wrote:
You approve of Trumps message above as you so stated and were quoted.

Lie. You are attempting to distort the message.
tmiddles wrote:
I read that message as planning a Ban on Muslims.

A distortion of the message.
tmiddles wrote:
So tough luck that's all perfectly honest and on the level.

Lie. You are not perfectly honest. You are not on the level.
tmiddles wrote:
HAD I misquoted you that wouldn't be cool and I wouldn't do that.

Lie. You have already misquoted him on multiple occasions. You have also misquoted me on multiple occasions. You have intentionally done so.
tmiddles wrote:
I even try to take the time to link back to other topics if I'm quoting in one from another.

Lie. You only link back to repetitions of your own arguments.
tmiddles wrote:
More importantly we're all here to speak for ourselves.

Lie. You are trying to speak for every author of every physics book that has ever been written. You are trying to speak for every scientist that has ever lived.


The Parrot Killer
04-09-2019 04:59
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:

Distorting the message yet again?


Nope that is direct from TRUMP and approved by you two, and it was on screen for a bit. It wasn't flashed as a subliminal message or something. So how did I distort anything?

Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
Oh so you were referencing everything ever written by how many people?

No, YOU are. It is YOU that attempting to reference everything written by everyone. Inversion fallacy.


I have provided real examples. And yes I have provided dozens of references. You two have provided nothing but "NO IT'S NOT VALID" as usual.

Try doing more than nothing. It'll be refreshing.

Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:You can claim it's something else but I'm free to call it was I like.

No, you do not get to assign any position to me that you like

I quote you IBD and without rewrites.

Lie. You are quoting a story that itself is a rewrite.

What are you talking about? I found TRUMP's own video, unedited, on youtube. No story to go with it. You guys wanted to pretend it doesn't call for a ban on Muslims. Because you're crazy.

Whisk is why this is so relevant to everything that is discussed.
04-09-2019 05:17
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1413)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:

Distorting the message yet again?


Nope that is direct from TRUMP and approved by you two, and it was on screen for a bit. It wasn't flashed as a subliminal message or something. So how did I distort anything?

Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
Oh so you were referencing everything ever written by how many people?

No, YOU are. It is YOU that attempting to reference everything written by everyone. Inversion fallacy.


I have provided real examples. And yes I have provided dozens of references. You two have provided nothing but "NO IT'S NOT VALID" as usual.

Try doing more than nothing. It'll be refreshing.

Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:You can claim it's something else but I'm free to call it was I like.

No, you do not get to assign any position to me that you like

I quote you IBD and without rewrites.

Lie. You are quoting a story that itself is a rewrite.

What are you talking about? I found TRUMP's own video, unedited, on youtube. No story to go with it. You guys wanted to pretend it doesn't call for a ban on Muslims. Because you're crazy.


Don't be such a dumbass.

I remember you saying it "felt like a punch in the gut". How about having a loved one murdered by a terrorist? Is that a punch in the gut too?

It was to be a TEMPORARY blockage until we could get a handle on who was crossing into our country. Grow up, you self centered ignorant POS.


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
04-09-2019 05:43
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Don't be such a dumbass.

I remember you saying it "felt like a punch in the gut". How about having a loved one murdered by a terrorist? Is that a punch in the gut too?

It was to be a TEMPORARY blockage until we could get a handle on who was crossing into our country. Grow up, you self centered ignorant POS.

Did I say it wasn't advertised on national television as a "temporary ban" on anyone part of the 2nd largest religion on Earth?

You could call it a thoughtful ban, a well intentioned ban, an OK ban or just a ban.

Having people spit on the freedom this country is founded on is a punch in the stomach you bet. Every time.

But how did I misrepresent it?
04-09-2019 06:46
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1413)
tmiddles wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Don't be such a dumbass.

I remember you saying it "felt like a punch in the gut". How about having a loved one murdered by a terrorist? Is that a punch in the gut too?

It was to be a TEMPORARY blockage until we could get a handle on who was crossing into our country. Grow up, you self centered ignorant POS.


Having people spit on the freedom this country is founded on is a punch in the stomach you bet. Every time.


Hell of a quote from a bleeding heart liberal...

Do you REALLY think Trump was going to ban US citizens from entering the country? The Constitution doesn't grant the freedom to foreigners to come and go as they please.

I thought I asked you not to be a dumbass.


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
04-09-2019 08:09
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:

Distorting the message yet again?


Nope that is direct from TRUMP and approved by you two, and it was on screen for a bit. It wasn't flashed as a subliminal message or something. So how did I distort anything?

Cherry picking fallacy. That's how.
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
Oh so you were referencing everything ever written by how many people?

No, YOU are. It is YOU that attempting to reference everything written by everyone. Inversion fallacy.


I have provided real examples.

Lie.
tmiddles wrote:
And yes I have provided dozens of references.

Lie. You never read any of them.
tmiddles wrote:
You two have provided nothing but "NO IT'S NOT VALID" as usual.

Lie.
tmiddles wrote:
Try doing more than nothing. It'll be refreshing.

Already have.
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:You can claim it's something else but I'm free to call it was I like.

No, you do not get to assign any position to me that you like

I quote you IBD and without rewrites.

Lie. You are quoting a story that itself is a rewrite.

What are you talking about? I found TRUMP's own video, unedited, on youtube. No story to go with it. You guys wanted to pretend it doesn't call for a ban on Muslims.

Trump didn't call for a ban on Muslims. He called for a ban on travel from SOME Muslim nations that have had a problem with controlling the training and harboring of terrorists. Read Executive order 13769.
tmiddles wrote:
Because you're crazy.

YALIF. Read Executive order 13769.
tmiddles wrote:
Whisk is why this is so relevant to everything that is discussed.

Nah. You are just taking things out of context again. You are a liar.


The Parrot Killer
04-09-2019 08:10
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Don't be such a dumbass.

I remember you saying it "felt like a punch in the gut". How about having a loved one murdered by a terrorist? Is that a punch in the gut too?

It was to be a TEMPORARY blockage until we could get a handle on who was crossing into our country. Grow up, you self centered ignorant POS.

Did I say it wasn't advertised on national television as a "temporary ban" on anyone part of the 2nd largest religion on Earth?

You could call it a thoughtful ban, a well intentioned ban, an OK ban or just a ban.

Having people spit on the freedom this country is founded on is a punch in the stomach you bet. Every time.

But how did I misrepresent it?

Read Executive Order 13769.


The Parrot Killer
04-09-2019 09:21
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Do you REALLY think Trump was going to ban US citizens...The Constitution doesn't grant the freedom to foreigners to come and go as they please.

I think everyone understood it would be confined to whatever TRUMP could do legally. He was going to try, that was the promise.

And despicable behavior of all types is allowed by the Constitution. It's not there to micro manage us. You always have to hope we have good people in office and that's often not the case.

We put Japanese citizens in internment camps based on their ethnicity.

Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:So how did I distort anything?
Cherry picking fallacy. That's how.

It's not "Cherry picking" when you specifically say it doesn't exist and I find it to show you it does:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: Almost as big and issue: He is a leader of hate. I still cannot believe the banning Muslims from the country was a real political ad.
What drugs are you smoking?

Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
...banning Muslims from the country was a real political ad....
...He never even attempted it. You are being a bigot now, and trying to change history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UoQff8MMVM

Quote: "He's calling for a temporary shut down of Muslim's entering the United States until we can figure out what's going on."
Calling for something, as a presidential candidate is certainly trying to make something happen.
So you were wrong, as is IBD. Factually wrong.

The ability to deny reality is pretty on topic for anything to be discussed.

Into the Night wrote:
Read Executive Order 13769.

The video stands on it's own. Presidential candidates don't issue executive orders.

Everyone watching the commercial on TV understood it then and now.
Edited on 04-09-2019 09:26
04-09-2019 09:32
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4640)
tmiddles wrote:Everyone watching the commercial on TV understood it then and now.

You obviously didn't.

I see you are still pretending to speak for everyone.

Aren't you just dying to ask me how I know that you are gullible and manipulated? ... that your opinions aren't really yours but we're handed to you?


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
04-09-2019 09:33
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:Everyone watching the commercial on TV understood it then and now.

You obviously didn't


No one of TRUMPs strong points is he's very clear in what he says. It's crazy but it's clear.
04-09-2019 16:44
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4640)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:Everyone watching the commercial on TV understood it then and now.

You obviously didn't


No one of TRUMPs strong points is he's very clear in what he says. It's crazy but it's clear.

You say Trump is very clear. What was his very clear point that you claim didn't misunderstand and that you wouldn't intentionally distort?


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
04-09-2019 17:23
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1197)
I don't remember Trump saying anything about a permanent ban on all Muslims on the planet. Just a temporary ban, on Muslims from countries with terrorist activities. Think there were 14 countries on the list, the ban was 120 days. I don't think it was such a bad thing, Muslims should be doing more to help clean their own house, so they don't get grouped with those nasty terrorists, that use their religion badly, to justify their actions.

We have a similar problem here, with drive-by shootings, which happen, pretty much everyday, in quite a few states. 'I didn't see nuthin', is what the folks living in those neighborhoods tend to say, even sitting in the back of an ambivalence, getting patch up. It's not one or two pops, that might be confused with a car backfiring, it's more in the 30-40 rounds range. Somebody knows who, and why, it's not just a joyride, there is a reason, usually a pretty silly reason too.
04-09-2019 17:45
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4640)
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't remember Trump saying anything about a permanent ban on all Muslims on the planet. Just a temporary ban, on Muslims from countries with terrorist activities.

Absolutely. That point was clear. Dishonest people always omit the prepositional phrase "until we can find out what the hell is going on." Trump could not have been any clearer that the problem was the State Department and their inadequate vetting that bordered on criminal negligence.

tmiddles problem is his dishonesty. He can't admit Trump's clear point without revealing his own intentional deception ... which would then expose his Marxist agenda. You should not expect any honesty to be forthcoming from tmiddles.

Into the Night pointed out the Executive Orders surrounding the travel restrictions which, if you read them, encapsulate the pledge Trump made while campaigning for the presidency and really amount to Trump fulfilling a campaign promise. The irony is that Trump built those executive orders off of Obama's executive orders ... that strangely don't get equally villified by those same dishonest people like tmiddles.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
04-09-2019 20:12
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Do you REALLY think Trump was going to ban US citizens...The Constitution doesn't grant the freedom to foreigners to come and go as they please.

I think everyone understood it would be confined to whatever TRUMP could do legally. He was going to try, that was the promise.

Never was. Contextomy fallacy. Cherry picking fallacy.
tmiddles wrote:
And despicable behavior of all types is allowed by the Constitution.

No, it is not.
tmiddles wrote:
It's not there to micro manage us.

True. It is there to define and declare the government of the United States and to give it certain powers and none other. It is also there to define certain agreements made between the States.

That is ALL the Constitution of the United States does. What YOU do has nothing to do with the Constitution of the United States.

tmiddles wrote:
You always have to hope we have good people in office and that's often not the case.

True.
tmiddles wrote:
We put Japanese citizens in internment camps based on their ethnicity.

True. An unconstitutional act. Putting Japanese spies and soldiers in internment camps however, is legal.
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:So how did I distort anything?
Cherry picking fallacy. That's how.

It's not "Cherry picking" when you specifically say it doesn't exist and I find it to show you it does:
Yes it is. Read the executive order. Look at his campaign platform.
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
[quote]tmiddles wrote: Almost as big and issue: He is a leader of hate. I still cannot believe the banning Muslims from the country was a real political ad.
What drugs are you smoking?

Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
...banning Muslims from the country was a real political ad....
...He never even attempted it. You are being a bigot now, and trying to change history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UoQff8MMVM

Quote: "He's calling for a temporary shut down of Muslim's entering the United States until we can figure out what's going on."

He also said it was for Muslims from terrorist nations and did not include all Muslims, liar.
tmiddles wrote:
Calling for something, as a presidential candidate is certainly trying to make something happen.

It happened too. He wrote out the executive order 13769, as promised, in the first 100 days of office.
tmiddles wrote:
So you were wrong, as is IBD.

Contextomy fallacy. Cherry picking fallacy.
tmiddles wrote:
Factually wrong.

Redefinition fallacy (fact<->argumen t). Learn what a 'fact' means.
tmiddles wrote:
The ability to deny reality is pretty on topic for anything to be discussed.

Define 'reality'. I know what it means. Do you?
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Read Executive Order 13769.

The video stands on it's own.

No, it doesn't. Cherry picking fallacy. Contextomy fallacy.
tmiddles wrote:
Presidential candidates don't issue executive orders.

Look at his campaign platform. See the executive order.
tmiddles wrote:
Everyone watching the commercial on TV understood it then and now.

Apparently YOU didn't.


The Parrot Killer
04-09-2019 20:13
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:Everyone watching the commercial on TV understood it then and now.

You obviously didn't


No one of TRUMPs strong points is he's very clear in what he says. It's crazy but it's clear.


Still rattling off what someone told you to say. Aren't you?


The Parrot Killer
04-09-2019 20:51
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't remember Trump saying anything about a permanent ban on all Muslims on the planet. Just a temporary ban, on Muslims from countries with terrorist activities.

Bingo.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Think there were 14 countries on the list,

Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen were listed by order 13769. Today, it is still seven, though the nations listed has changed.
Per order 13780, the list is now Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, and Somalia.
HarveyH55 wrote:
the ban was 120 days.

90, per order 13769. Order 13780 bans travel from the listed countries today.
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't think it was such a bad thing, Muslims should be doing more to help clean their own house, so they don't get grouped with those nasty terrorists, that use their religion badly, to justify their actions.

The problem is that Islam has no leading authority. Mohammad is dead, and there was no succession of leading authority. To 'clean house' in this way, you first have to have someone in charge of the 'house'.

The violent, radical nature of some Muslims come from the teachings of their local leaders (which are also political leaders) in an effort to expand their power by attacking anything not their own (including anyone from the United States). Since they are obviously outnumbered, they turn to guerilla tactics and terrorism to conduct their war. Those local leaders are in the countries listed in order 13769. Due to the requirements of hat order, the Dept of Homeland Security submitted a list of nations to be included on the list, and order 13780 was the result.
HarveyH55 wrote:
We have a similar problem here, with drive-by shootings, which happen, pretty much everyday, in quite a few states. 'I didn't see nuthin', is what the folks living in those neighborhoods tend to say, even sitting in the back of an ambivalence, getting patch up. It's not one or two pops, that might be confused with a car backfiring, it's more in the 30-40 rounds range. Somebody knows who, and why, it's not just a joyride, there is a reason, usually a pretty silly reason too.


Often they actually didn't see anything. Such attacks are, after all, designed to surprise the victims.

Somebody knows who, true. They won't talk because they are also in a gang, or they live in fear of a gang.


The Parrot Killer
04-09-2019 22:44
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4640)
Into the Night wrote: The problem is that Islam has no leading authority.

Also, the term Islam is a broad umbrella category. Only with great care and great difficulty can someone craft a statement about Muslims that applies to all Muslims. The same can be said about Christianity. The same can be said about Catholics would supposedly have a leader.

Which is why Trump specified Muslims from specific terror-cultivating countries in which the US has insufficient vetting, and Trump never said that "Muslims" were the problem, only that those specific Muslims would fall under the temporary control mechanism.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
05-09-2019 03:03
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
...one of TRUMPs strong points is he's very clear

You say Trump is very clear. What was his very clear point that you claim didn't misunderstand and that you wouldn't intentionally distort?



HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't remember Trump saying anything about a permanent ban on all Muslims on the planet. Just a temporary ban, on Muslims from countries with terrorist activities.


Edited on 05-09-2019 03:04
06-09-2019 21:08
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4640)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
...one of TRUMPs strong points is he's very clear

You say Trump is very clear. What was his very clear point that you claim didn't misunderstand and that you wouldn't intentionally distort?


Nope. I specified one "that you wouldn't intentionally distort."

Try again.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
07-09-2019 07:04
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
IBdaMann wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
...one of TRUMPs strong points is he's very clear

You say Trump is very clear. What was his very clear point that you claim didn't misunderstand and that you wouldn't intentionally distort?

Nope. I specified one "that you wouldn't intentionally distort."
Try again.

So an unedited frame from TRUMPs first campaign ad is a distortion? How is that?

Do you have an explanation for that seemingly insane claim?
07-09-2019 07:29
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4640)
tmiddles wrote:So an unedited frame from TRUMPs first campaign ad is a distortion? How is that?

That one frame is not the message. It is but one frame.

But let's remember this day that you admit being puzzled at how dishonesty isn't right while you demand "explanations."


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
07-09-2019 08:57
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
...one of TRUMPs strong points is he's very clear

You say Trump is very clear. What was his very clear point that you claim didn't misunderstand and that you wouldn't intentionally distort?

Nope. I specified one "that you wouldn't intentionally distort."
Try again.

So an unedited frame from TRUMPs first campaign ad is a distortion? How is that?

Do you have an explanation for that seemingly insane claim?


Repetitious questions that have already been answered.


The Parrot Killer
07-09-2019 11:20
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
IBdaMann wrote:
That one frame is not the message. It is but one frame.

It's a 30 second spot and I posted the link to it. So no one was deprived of the context (unless they couldn't spare 30 seconds, and that's their choice).
youtube.com/watch?v=2UoQff8MMVM PLEASE WATCH, it's TRUMP!
The reason I posted it is ITN incorrectly claimed Trump never called for a ban on Muslims entering the country.

Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
The banning Muslim's from the country ad in 2016 was the first shock to the system.
No one banned Muslims. No one even tried.

Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
RenaissanceMan wrote:
tmiddles "hates" Trump for doing exactly what Obama did and what Clinton did.
Obama and Clinton call for a ban on Muslim's entering the country?
No one has called for a ban on Muslims entering the country.

It's your willingness to deny the undeniable that is frightening. Global Warming activists could have no greater prize than ding bats like you posing as the opposition.

So we come back again to the never answered question:
So IBD, what is the right way to do it your opinion? silence

Also just to be clear are you also claiming that Trump never called for a ban on Muslims entering the country?


Edited on 07-09-2019 11:21
07-09-2019 19:47
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4640)
tmiddles wrote:The reason I posted it is ITN incorrectly claimed Trump never called for a ban on Muslims entering the country.

In a forum of ideas, words are all we have.

In English, a sentence is an independent clause that expresses a complete thought.

All the dishonest Trump-bashers seek to distort Trump's message and one pervasive tactic that you have demonstrated is to invalidly breaking apart his sentences and to present something other than the complete sentences he spoke. In this case, you simply will not include the prepositional phrase "until we can find out what is going on" (0:00:13-0:00:15) because that presents a completely different context and message as a whole. You only showed one visual frame that did not include that prepositional phrase and continue to insist that that is somehow the entire message. It takes a special type of dishonesty to insist that [obviously not the whole message] is [the whole message].


tmiddles wrote: Global Warming activists could have no greater prize than ding bats like you posing as the opposition.

Global Warming activists, i.e. Climate Scientists, can have no greater loss of credibility than to rely solely on dishonesty and fallcies targetting the gullible.

tmiddles wrote: So we come back again to the never answered question: So IBD, what is the right way to do it your opinion? silence

Let me know when you want to discuss.

tmiddles wrote:Also just to be clear are you also claiming that Trump never called for a ban on Muslims entering the country?

Just to be clear, are you asking if I claim that Trump called for temporary travel restrictions from a few terrorism hotbeds until State Department issues could be rooted out and fixed?

Yes or no?


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
07-09-2019 20:42
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
That one frame is not the message. It is but one frame.

It's a 30 second spot and I posted the link to it. So no one was deprived of the context (unless they couldn't spare 30 seconds, and that's their choice).

You are INTRODUCING context, by cherry picking one statement instead of looking at the campaign or the executive orders he made.
tmiddles wrote:
The reason I posted it is ITN incorrectly claimed Trump never called for a ban on Muslims entering the country.

Never did.
tmiddles wrote:
It's your willingness to deny the undeniable that is frightening. Global Warming activists could have no greater prize than ding bats like you posing as the opposition.

Like the way you approach everything else, you are making a contextomy fallacy, this time based on a cherry picking fallacy.

You're a liar.
tmiddles wrote:
So we come back again to the never answered question:
So IBD, what is the right way to do it your opinion? silence

Repetitious question already answered.


The Parrot Killer
07-09-2019 23:17
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
IBdaMann wrote:...you simply will not include the prepositional phrase "until we can find out what is going on" (0:00:13-0:00:15)
Wrong as usual (link):
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
It is taken out of context....
...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UoQff8MMVM
Quote: "He's calling for a temporary shut down of Muslim's entering the United States until we can figure out what's going on."
And the only thing "Until we figure out what's going on" adds is a child like idiocy I don't want to see broadcast from anyone. It's such a stupid thing to say that one can be assured nothing will ever be figured out by the person saying it.

IBdaMann wrote:
...are you asking if I claim that Trump called for temporary travel restrictions ...

Nope. I'm asking if this quote "He's calling for a temporary shut down of Muslim's entering the United States until we can figure out what's going on." read over this image, is a reality you deny.

Because ITN does deny reality:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
The reason I posted it is ITN incorrectly claimed Trump never called for a ban on Muslims entering the country.
Never did.

Now that is simply insane. No grip on reality. No explanation even provided. Wow!

What ITN fails to grasp is I'm not proving Trump is a bigot and a moron (this he has done on his own). I'm proving that ITN is insane.
08-09-2019 09:06
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...you simply will not include the prepositional phrase "until we can find out what is going on" (0:00:13-0:00:15)
Wrong as usual (link):
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
It is taken out of context....
...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UoQff8MMVM
Quote: "He's calling for a temporary shut down of Muslim's entering the United States until we can figure out what's going on."
And the only thing "Until we figure out what's going on" adds is a child like idiocy I don't want to see broadcast from anyone. It's such a stupid thing to say that one can be assured nothing will ever be figured out by the person saying it.

IBdaMann wrote:
...are you asking if I claim that Trump called for temporary travel restrictions ...

Nope. I'm asking if this quote "He's calling for a temporary shut down of Muslim's entering the United States until we can figure out what's going on." read over this image, is a reality you deny.

Because ITN does deny reality:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
The reason I posted it is ITN incorrectly claimed Trump never called for a ban on Muslims entering the country.
Never did.

Now that is simply insane. No grip on reality. No explanation even provided. Wow!

What ITN fails to grasp is I'm not proving Trump is a bigot and a moron (this he has done on his own). I'm proving that ITN is insane.

YALIF.


The Parrot Killer
08-09-2019 22:36
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
Into the Night wrote:
YALIF.

"YALIF" must have just a private definition, like your personal definition of science, it doesn't come up online at all.
08-09-2019 23:15
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
YALIF.

"YALIF" must have just a private definition, like your personal definition of science, it doesn't come up online at all.


It is.

Yet Another Lame Insult Fallacy.


The Parrot Killer
09-09-2019 11:03
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1142)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
"YALIF" must have just a private definition,...

It is.

Anything to further your quest to bloat the board with dead wood. You are effectively doing whatever you can to censor this forum out of existence by shouting everything down. You have been largely successful.
09-09-2019 19:23
Into the Night
★★★★★
(9286)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
"YALIF" must have just a private definition,...

It is.

Anything to further your quest to bloat the board with dead wood. You are effectively doing whatever you can to censor this forum out of existence by shouting everything down. You have been largely successful.

YALIF. Lie.


The Parrot Killer
Page 2 of 6<1234>>>





Join the debate Our Fragile Planet:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Petition to pressure governments to save the planet and humankind1024-08-2019 05:16
Satellite confirms key NASA temperature data: The planet is warming — and fast422-05-2019 18:30
UN climate chief warns of 'catastrophe' if planet continues on current path026-04-2019 15:34
If Democrats rule America then in 100 years America will be biggest CO2 emitter on the planet126-04-2019 00:41
Global Climate Strike: Meet the teenagers skipping school to fight for a greener planet913-04-2019 20:34
Articles
Barack Obama: Energy Independence and the Safety of Our Planet
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact