Simon Viavant wrote:Phatscotty wrote: The muslim name, also just way too convenient.
In other words you're a trolling, racist, moronic prick?
I know you are but what am I?
Moderator: Community Team
Simon Viavant wrote:Phatscotty wrote: The muslim name, also just way too convenient.
In other words you're a trolling, racist, moronic prick?
jonesthecurl wrote:A very witty person with an original response.
Skoffin wrote: So um.. er... I'll be honest, I don't know what the f*ck to do from here. Goddamnit chu.
Fircoal wrote:The real question, is why do you care so much if he was born in Kenya or not? He was born in Hawaii, there's proof of that, but even if he wasn't. Who really cares? Just cause he was born in Kenya doesn't mean he's loyal to it. (Just like someone born in the US isn't always loyal to it)
PLAYER57832 wrote:I hope we all become liberal drones.
Strife wrote:Fircoal wrote:The real question, is why do you care so much if he was born in Kenya or not? He was born in Hawaii, there's proof of that, but even if he wasn't. Who really cares? Just cause he was born in Kenya doesn't mean he's loyal to it. (Just like someone born in the US isn't always loyal to it)
I believe you have to be born in the United States to become it's president at the moment, I hear there was a bill that was going to change it to a citizen but not sure if it was passed.
waseemalim wrote:@phatscotty: And so what if a Kenyan is running the country. You think the whites are smarter than blacks? Isnt that a bit KKK-ist?
Fircoal wrote:The real question, is why do you care so much if he was born in Kenya or not? He was born in Hawaii, there's proof of that, but even if he wasn't. Who really cares? Just cause he was born in Kenya doesn't mean he's loyal to it. (Just like someone born in the US isn't always loyal to it)
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
Frigidus wrote:waseemalim wrote:@phatscotty: And so what if a Kenyan is running the country. You think the whites are smarter than blacks? Isnt that a bit KKK-ist?
The Kenyan thing is just a legal excuse thrown up to shadow the fact that some people won't accept a black (half-black, I know, whatever) president. How many white president's birth certificates have you seen? I haven't seen a single one. Gee, I wonder what made people so suspicious this time around...
Carebian Knight wrote:Obama's background includes just about everything that has to do with hating America in most Americans opinions.
Carebian Knight wrote:He has a Muslim background
Carebian Knight wrote:and has slipped up a few times calling himself a Muslim instead of a Christian(odd imo).
Carebian Knight wrote:The average American today associates Muslim with terrorist. They only here about the extremist Muslims that want to bring about an end to Western Civilization and they associate that with every Muslim in the world.
Carebian Knight wrote:In the meantime most whites that aren't still racist are scared about the possibility of that retribution coming to pass.
Carebian Knight wrote:IMO, the people that continue to fight for total access to his proof of eligibility are better than those that have lain down and accepted Obama's word just because he's half-black or a good public speaker.
Carebian Knight wrote:I don't really care whether he's Kenyan or American. I don't like him. His policies never made sense to me and his performance so far has disgusted me. Many of the things he criticized Bush for he has continued or made worse. He continues to bail out failing entities instead of giving stimulus to the average American and allowing the populace to decide who survives and who dies. Last I checked that's what a free market was.
Strife wrote:Fircoal wrote:The real question, is why do you care so much if he was born in Kenya or not? He was born in Hawaii, there's proof of that, but even if he wasn't. Who really cares? Just cause he was born in Kenya doesn't mean he's loyal to it. (Just like someone born in the US isn't always loyal to it)
I believe you have to be born in the United States to become it's president at the moment, I hear there was a bill that was going to change it to a citizen but not sure if it was passed.
Skoffin wrote: So um.. er... I'll be honest, I don't know what the f*ck to do from here. Goddamnit chu.
Phatscotty wrote:race has nothing to do with it. there is only one side that continues to bring race into it. quite hypocritical.
Fircoal wrote:Strife wrote:Fircoal wrote:The real question, is why do you care so much if he was born in Kenya or not? He was born in Hawaii, there's proof of that, but even if he wasn't. Who really cares? Just cause he was born in Kenya doesn't mean he's loyal to it. (Just like someone born in the US isn't always loyal to it)
I believe you have to be born in the United States to become it's president at the moment, I hear there was a bill that was going to change it to a citizen but not sure if it was passed.
Uh Strife I'm well aware that is the law, I'm just more wondering why it is the law, and why some people actually care if that law is broken or not.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
Phatscotty wrote:race has nothing to do with it. there is only one side that continues to bring race into it. quite hypocritical.
Frigidus wrote:Carebian Knight wrote:Obama's background includes just about everything that has to do with hating America in most Americans opinions.
Oh, come on, most Americans certainly don't think Obama hates America. I'd argue that all reasonable people don't think Obama hates America.
I never said most Americans hate Obama, I said that most Americans associate his background with the same people that have reasons to hate AmericaCarebian Knight wrote:He has a Muslim background
What a terrible person.
You seem to think I hate him because he's Muslim, I'm not talking about myself. I'm talking about the average American that I've met throughout my life.Carebian Knight wrote:and has slipped up a few times calling himself a Muslim instead of a Christian(odd imo).
Source? I haven't heard this anywhere.
It's on youtube. He slipped up in an interview saying "my Muslim religion" and was corrected after about 10 seconds by the interviewer. It's possible that his mind was wandering and he got tongue-tied or something, but I've never slipped up when talking about my religion and he has done it publicly 2 or 3 times.Carebian Knight wrote:The average American today associates Muslim with terrorist. They only here about the extremist Muslims that want to bring about an end to Western Civilization and they associate that with every Muslim in the world.
Well, that's racism isn't it? I mean, wouldn't you say that's a very twisted view of the world?
It's prejudice, not racism. Muslim isn't a race. That is a very twisted view of the world. It's brought about by the main media in America and the average Americans unwillingness to actually look up their own information. On the news you here about The Taliban and Al-Qaeda and such attacking civilians and extremist Muslims calling for the destruction of Israel. You don't hear about the Muslims that aren't extremist, so most seem to just think that the only kind of Muslim is an extremist Muslim.Carebian Knight wrote:In the meantime most whites that aren't still racist are scared about the possibility of that retribution coming to pass.
I'd say that fearing retribution from an entire race, while not perhaps outright racist, is very prejudiced. At the very least it shows a lack of understanding of that group of people.
I agree it shows a lack of understanding of that group of people, but don't know where you got the racist part from. It's human nature to get revenge, the abolitionists and most of the civil rights leaders didn't call for retribution, they called for an end to racism in all forms. Now that it has been secured for the most part, more and more are speaking out about the oppression of the whites on the blacks and talking of "retribution." Those that fear the passing of that retribution are simply giving into human instinct, I don't get how you think fear and racism are always connected.Carebian Knight wrote:IMO, the people that continue to fight for total access to his proof of eligibility are better than those that have lain down and accepted Obama's word just because he's half-black or a good public speaker.
Neither of those are reasons that people assume he is an American (at least to my knowledge).
Did you watch the weeks leading up to the election? The polls and everything that were taken at the time. Many people admitted that they were voting for Obama because he was half-black. The good public speaker thing just goes back to people not actually researching someone. Obama is a much better speaker than McCain is, so more people are naturally going to be drawn to him, it's historical fact.Carebian Knight wrote:I don't really care whether he's Kenyan or American. I don't like him. His policies never made sense to me and his performance so far has disgusted me. Many of the things he criticized Bush for he has continued or made worse. He continues to bail out failing entities instead of giving stimulus to the average American and allowing the populace to decide who survives and who dies. Last I checked that's what a free market was.
OK, while I disagree with this it isn't an unreasonable position. But come on, what you described above was basically a longer, slightly more sympathetic, way of saying they want to see the birth certificate because they're racist. Sure, not anything KKK level, but it doesn't take a white hood to make one a racist. Fear of Muslims and blacks isn't racist?
No I was explaining that they wanted to see the birth certificate because so far there has been no DEFINITIVE proof that he was born in Hawaii. All those of us that don't live in Hawaii have to go on is the word of someone else and pictures in papers.
phatscotty wrote:race has nothing to do with it. there is only one side that continues to bring race into it. quite hypocritical.
Titanic wrote:Well CarribeanKnight actually brought it up first, so its seems that is your side...
Frigidus wrote:Your side brings up the Muslim bit all the time, and even if they don't I still don't see a legitimate reason aside from race that you want to see Obama's birth certificate as opposed to George Bush's or Bill Clinton's.
Carebian Knight wrote:Yes, Obama's opposition does bring up the Muslim thing all the time. Obama however isn't helping to much. Some months ago he decided that the US shouldn't give so much aid to Israel and should instead talk to the other Middle East countries for peace(talk about not knowing a group of people.) The Arab countries of the Middle East will never be talked into peace, they will only sign peace with Israel on their own terms in their own time. I'm not talking about the Muslim-Jewish tension either, there is now Israeli-Arab tension that runs just as deep. The Middle East won't see peace anytime soon but many seem to refuse to believe that.
Phatscotty wrote:Why the F would you defend something you've never seen? never been released to you? all you have is a politician/lawyers word(how you think a politician/lawyer is trustworthy is beyond me).
What we don't know - if the birth certificate exists(you CAN NOT say it does for sure if you haven't seen it)
What we do know - He has a Kenyan/muslim name, and was raised in mulsim countries until he was 10
AS of this moment you defenders are going on BLIND FAITH, and that is VERY DANGEROUS
Titanic wrote:Thats complete crap. Israel and Egypt signed a peace treaty years ago, after long negotiations where both sides were happy with the agreement. The attitude your taking will mean that there will never be peace in the Middle East, Obama's route of actually talking to the countries can and has led to more peaceful and cooperative situations, as shown by historical examples. Also, Obama being friendly has led to a huge split within Iran as they do not know how to respond. When Bush put them in the Axis of Evil all Iran needed to do was tell its citizens that USA was imperialist, be nice to them and suddenly your the good guy and the dictatorship and other regimes find it harder to convince the populations that the foreigners are evil and should be hated.
Carebian Knight wrote:The Arab countries of the Middle East will never be talked into peace, they will only sign peace with Israel on their own terms in their own time. I'm not talking about the Muslim-Jewish tension either, there is now Israeli-Arab tension that runs just as deep. The Middle East won't see peace anytime soon but many seem to refuse to believe that.

jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
Carebian Knight wrote:Please point out where in that post I said that The Middle East will never see peace. Or instead you could go back and read it again and then create a reply that actually makes sense. The average Iranian didn't have a problem with America when Bush was in office, there was no split because of Obama. The gov't hates America because we tried to oust them. Obama is talking to countries that have proven by historical examples that they don't care. Maybe the current gov't will say that there can be peace, but the next gov't isn't required to follow that promise.
Egypt signed peace with Israel because they got what they wanted from it. They got the Sinai back and a promise that Israel wouldn't invade it again. Now they are good buddies, Egypt and Israel work together quite often. What other Arab nation can get what they want from Israel? None of them. They are either ruled by the extremist Muslim belief that Israel has to be wiped off the map, or they want the territory that Israel currently owns. Israel has always been happy to go to the table with it's neighbors and discuss terms, they have made many concessions in the past, Egypt being one of them. The other nations simply want more than Israel is able to offer and that is why there will not be peace in the Middle East anytime soon, no matter how convincing Obama is.
Titanic wrote:"The average Iranian didn't have a problem with America when Bush was in office" - This quote alone proves that you do not know anything.
Prove to me that is incorrect
"The gov't hates America because we tried to oust them." - No, their hatred extends from when we reinstated the Shah about 50 years ago and took away their democratically elected leader, and all of it for oil (shows how much we have advanced since then...).
Yes, we screwed with their gov't. Maybe not what I said exactly but along the same lines.
"Obama is talking to countries that have proven by historical examples that they don't care." - The IRA had no historical example of caring or wanting peace, but from the mid-90's onwards intense diplomatic efforts have worked and NI and the UK as a whole are now peaceful.
Before I can answer this truthfully you are going to have to expand the abbreviations.
"What other Arab nation can get what they want from Israel? None of them. They are either ruled by the extremist Muslim belief that Israel has to be wiped off the map, or they want the territory that Israel currently owns." - You've managed to categorise ever single Arab country into those two categories? Ignorant much?
Those are very vague categories, I don't see the issue with putting all Middle East Arab countries into those two categories. Please point out the countries other than Egypt that don't fit into these categories.
"Israel has always been happy to go to the table with it's neighbors and discuss terms, they have made many concessions in the past," - I would hardly say Israel has been reasonable in its negotiations. Look at the situation currently, they continue to take over Palestinian land in East Jerusalem and evict Muslims and throw them out of their houses so that they can build more houses on the land for Israeli citizens. Israel cannot be described as a good country which has always seeked peaceful solutions, a lot of its current problems and violence are self-inflicted.
Recently, your right Israel has turned into quite the bully. When the state was first formed Israel was the one that complied with the negotiations and their enemies were the ones that usually broke them. IMO Israel got tired of it and has finally started fighting fire with fire. Is it right? No. Is it the best strategy? No. Do they have more reason than their enemies to do it? Yes.