|
|
Post by Demona on Sept 5, 2010 3:48:51 GMT -5
There's too much to quote here. I'm just going to say that if people gave money to an organization they DIDN'T know was a supporter of a terrorist group, then it's exactly that. A mistake. Saying someone's a terrorist supporter for using Microsoft, even if joking, is such a stupid way to think.
On the issue of signatures, it's not tongue and cheek when someone asks nicely you remove something and then say "Bite me." Even shoving the mix up in their face like that is horribly immature. Even if Jersey wasn't a mod, it could be removed by the rest because it's done to provoke him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slayzie on Sept 5, 2010 4:38:05 GMT -5
Oh, the signature wasn't tongue-in-cheek, what I was refering to by that was the part of my post where I said that if Jersey genuinely thought his accusation was logical, then he was anti-american by association.
I felt I should add a disclaimer, since he's still got a stick up his ass over the time I said that it'd be humorously ironic if he killed a friend or family member with his beloved firearms, and I assumed he's lose his crap if he thought I was genuinely accusing him of being a terrorist supporter.
I wasn't, I was just pointing out that there's nothing wrong with building a building just because one of its sponsors has also sponsored a pretentious charity in the past, and that to say there was a definite conscious link between the building and the dodgy charity was as ridiculous as saying there was a conscious link between him and the charity.
As for the signature, he didn't politely ask. He masked an obvious threat in a veneer of civility and expected me to comply. Bugger that. If he has a problem with me quoting something he wrote, he shouldn't have written it. If he wants to remove it by force, he can do his worst.
If he actually asked politely, as in, not "I'll ask you once, please do this, or else!", but just "please do this", I would have been a lot happier to acquiesce.
But he didn't. So I'm not. End of.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason O'Lewa on Sept 5, 2010 10:33:34 GMT -5
i do not see the last few posts having a lot to do with mosqu or not build it or build it somewhere else
jersey misspoke in a manner of speaking mistyped or what have you
to put it in your sig is just a tormented thing
i think that the polite thing would to remove it
maybe jerseys remark according to possum was not so right but he would not have said it had the sig been modified back to how it was.
uptite about thinking shooting a friend accidentally could be humorous? I cant see why you would find that funny anyway
i like you as a member slayzie but I cant follow that
what point would something like that prove? you thought perhaps if that happens it would change his views on having guns in the house?
i dont condone what the uni-bomber did but I would not find it funny if some explosives accidently blew up his friends house and killed them
slayzie I do think you have turned this into a chance to harass jersey instead of discuss the topic
possum the only thing you have offered it that muslims have the same right to religious freedom as the rest of the religions
how about this
the catholic churches have put together schools
almost every catholic church has a school either a grade school or high school or both
every city has atleast 1 or 2 catholic hospitals whenever theyres a hospital called st marys or nativity hospital those are catholic run and funded
city missions labeld st lukes or whatever are catholic too
protestant churches to things like that too with schools.
pat robertson and some of his baptist afilliates have companies called operation blessing where they will pay utilities for under privledged people
rabi benjamin yudin sends people to comunities to collects food for for the poor. he calls it feed the world
a pastor larry jones does that too he calls it club 1000 I dont know what kind of christian larry jones is sorry I dont remember but he is a minister
i cant think of any famous muslims doing things of that elaborate degre for people who are not of their own kind
if you name some id like to know of their comtrbutions to
these other religious people do for everybody not just their faith
thats on topic
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil on Sept 5, 2010 16:54:40 GMT -5
I remember there was a thread called forum rules. It was once stick pinned at the tops of all the sections throughout the forum.
It must have been unstuck and allowed to slide down. Its not important though the rules are still in place. Excessive swearing is not not allowed. Circumventing filters to post swearing is not allowed, and intentionally offeing members is not allowed, and failure to conform is definitely not allowed.
These are rules placed nearly 7 years ago and upheld even with some changes to the forum's moldings.
I think removing that from the signature would be the right thing to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slayzie on Sept 6, 2010 8:55:36 GMT -5
Jason, I'm not using this topic as an excuse to harass Jersey. If telling someone they're wrong, and using examples which they can relate to to support my points constitutes harassment, then the definition of harassment has changed since I last looked it up. Muslims are just as active in humanitarian work as other religions. A quick google search for "muslim charities" will tell you this. The first result I got was the Muslim Aid Australia website, whose mission statement declares: How about Muslim Hands, an international organisation dedicated to helping the needy, based on the belief: There are numerous other similar organisations too, such as Islamic Relief. |
|
|
|
Post by Jason O'Lewa on Sept 6, 2010 12:23:33 GMT -5
Jason, I'm not using this topic as an excuse to harass Jersey. If telling someone they're wrong, and using examples which they can relate to to support my points constitutes harassment, then the definition of harassment has changed since I last looked it up. Its good to know that some islamic orgainzations are on board with helping others. I am not aware of those groups in the us but they are probably evreywhere and they are needed more in needier countries anyway the definition of harassment has not changed but you are displaying it. i dont agree with a lot of things people say I know some of the things to be wrong they are not in my signature so he mistypes something. you put it in your signature to make him look foolish because you knew that was the wrong country in the type. that was harassment there was no constructive criticizing there if there had been you would have just corrected the post when the person who misspoke corrected himself and asked you to remove the post. you left it and added bite me to the sig. thats further harassment the definition of harassment is the same |
|
|
|
Post by Slayzie on Sept 7, 2010 1:31:17 GMT -5
so he mistypes something. you put it in your signature to make him look foolish because you knew that was the wrong country in the type. that was harassment there was no constructive criticizing there It was not meant as harassment or criticism. I was just having a laugh at the fact that he was trying to give the impression that he knew what he was talking about, however the one part of his post that was not outright speculation was blatantly obviously incorrect. if there had been you would have just corrected the post Which I did, but I thought it was funny, so I quoted it. when the person who misspoke corrected himself and asked you to remove the post. you left it and added bite me to the sig. thats further harassment. I would put it to you that the manner in which he asked me to remove it was at least as "harassing" as my initial action. If he'd been polite about it, I wouldn't have minded, but I don't take kindly to threats. So yeah, Jersey, if you're reading this and you want the quote gone, you need only follow through with your "flexing of the e-muscles", as Possum dubbed it. But I'm not doing anything voluntarily. |
|
|
|
Post by Classicblast on Sept 7, 2010 1:45:31 GMT -5
I remember there was a thread called forum rules. It was once stick pinned at the tops of all the sections throughout the forum. I remember the rules too I also agree with the posts especially what Jason posted. If a news reporter or a politician accidentally called called George Bush George Washington people would probably get tee shirts with Bush's picture and the name George Washington on it. In the case of a news reporter or politician they're a public figure they have to deal with that. It's different here. Its more like if someone in math class mistakenly said "so 3 times 3 is 6" when they meant to say "3 plus 3 is 6," and another student who squabbled with that person got a tee shirt that said "according to (students name) 3 times 3 is 6. After the point had already been made this person refused to remove the shirt being suspended from school or attacked in the school yard might be ramifications of that. I would hate to see anybody attacked but it happens all the time in the world over disagreements. I do think since you refuse to remove the signature after all this time you are subject to moderator actions. Maybe you don't care but at this point it's not unreasonable. |
|
|
|
Post by Jersey on Sept 7, 2010 22:05:35 GMT -5
But I do think this time, since you refuse to remove the signature after all this time you are subject to moderator actions. Maybe you don't care but at this point it's not unreasonable. That's all I needed to hear. Slayzie. I've had it with you. Because I made one simple error in one of my arguments, you decided to capitalize and put it in your signature, not only in an effort to make fun of me, but in an attempt to make me look foolish. That in itself was an insult. But the fact that when you were asked (and I don't give a flying sh*t what you say to the contrary) politely to remove it after I corrected my error, you refused. Not out of spite for a so-called "veiled threat", but because you never intended to do it anyway. It was not meant as harassment or criticism. Bullcrap. So yeah, Jersey, if you're reading this and you want the quote gone, you need only follow through with your "flexing of the e-muscles", as Possum dubbed it. Oh, you're getting more than that. Oh, the signature wasn't tongue-in-cheek. Your "tongue-in-cheek" drivel is just your way of being a total jackass to someone while, at the same time, shirking responsibility for your behavior behind the veil of "just making fun" or "just kidding around". I don't accept that excuse because I find it to be bullcrap. It's the same thing as saying something foul about someone's mother and when that person gets pissed off (as they SHOULD), you say "no offense". It's your way of being the way you are and trying to escape responsibility. And your "disclaimer" is bullcrap too, because you are yet to apologize for your behavior back in April. You are yet to apologize for what you said I deserved to do to my family (and that you would laugh about it) because you meant every word you said. So yeah, in case you were wondering, I'm still pissed off about it. And that will never change. I don't care if you think I'm wrong and you argue against me constructively. You had no right to say what you said. I should have banned you for it back then, and I still to this day wonder why I didn't think to do it. If he has a problem with me quoting something he wrote, he shouldn't have written it. That has got to be the most ridiculous thing I have heard in a long time. If he actually asked politely, as in, not "I'll ask you once, please do this, or else!", but just "please do this", I would have been a lot happier to acquiesce. Bullcrap. You would have continued doing exactly what you are doing now. Except in that case, you would be laughing at my so-called "groveling" or "begging" of you to remove it. I don't beg. In the face of not only my request, an administrator of this forum (NOT just a mod), you also refused in the face of requests from not only another moderator but the head administrator. That directly breaks the forum rules because you were first asked by an administrator (me) to remove it and you didn't. "Bite me" was your response. Then you were asked by two other administrators and a member to remove it (politely, as you would interpret it), and still refused. If he wants to remove it by force, he can do his worst. Oh you can bet that I'm more than happy to oblige in "doing my worst". Indeed. The end of your membership. You are banned from the forum. You chose the wrong person to challenge because I have the ability to throw members out of here. Too bad...I don't think you realized that until just now. Maybe if you had, you might have complied with my request. Like I said before to Possum. "Very simple". But you had to keep pushing me. Hmm. I'm thinking you probably hate me now. Probably think I'm wrong or out of line for what I'm doing. Well, good. The feeling is then, officially, mutual. I should have done this a long time ago. This topic is now closed. Slayzie, your membership is permanently terminated unless I hear serious objections or fair arguments from other members (other than those from your forum friend(s) that sided with you against me in a condescending manner. They are on notice as well for actions that needed deleted) or something gives me a reason to lift it. But I don't see that happening. Member banned. Topic closed. |
|
|
|
Post by Mahnarch on Sept 8, 2010 10:59:33 GMT -5
Omfg, Slayzie always butts into topics about things he wouldn't understand because he's not freaking from here! They have a right to have a center. For the reasons listed it would be a bad idea in that f*cking spot. END OF.  I don't understand why I have to be from the USA to answer a simple question of human rights. The United States constitution provides the right of freedom of religion to all its citizens. This means that Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, and everyone else are allowed to follow their beliefs, worship their god/s, and so on. I don't see anything in there about freedom of religion being retracted if they want to worship near a site where someone associated with them did something bad. I understand that it may concern some people, but that doesn't change the fact that they have every right to go ahead with this. And, just for the record,  I'm skipping 2 pages ahead but: Rauf is Al Queda. Al Queda wants to put up a mosque. I'm not against Muslims. I'm against 'A' Muslim - and his name is Ralph (Angelisized). Image you're a deer. You go down to the babbling brook. And, as you lower your little deer head down to take a drink from the brook - BAAM!!! A bullet blows your brains all over the forest! Now, I ask 'ya. Would you care what color pants the son of a b!tch who shot ya was wearin'?! |
|
