aquatus1 Posted January 21, 2009 #51 Share Posted January 21, 2009 IM a terrorist? You most certainly are. Ingrid Mattson is associated with Islamic Society of North America, which is linked to Hamas. That makes Mattson a terrorist. Obama is associated with Mattson. That makes Obama a terrorist. John Cornyn is associated with Obama. That makes Cornyn a terrorist. Elsa Murano is associated with Cornyn. That makes Murano a terrorist. I am associated with Murano. That makes me a terrorist. You are associated with me. That makes you a terrorist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neognosis Posted January 21, 2009 #52 Share Posted January 21, 2009 GASP! In 2008 and 2009, Preacherman spend a lot of time online fraternizing with someone who has ties to a terrorist! ergo.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithisco Posted January 21, 2009 #53 Share Posted January 21, 2009 (edited) I'm with Cradle of Fish on this one.... turn the other cheek? No Preacherman, Christian bloodlust has so much to account for. Jesus (if he was a real person) was just that ..... a person, not endowed with Jedi powers, just a good speaker. Islam recognises Jesus as a prophet - not the Messiah - Judaism recognises Jesus as a prophet, not a Messiah - it is just the **EDIT** view of Christianity that recognises him as a Messiah. Look at the body-count as a result!!! **You don't need to bash other's beliefs to make a point** Edited January 21, 2009 by aquatus1 Inflamatory Remarks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stardrive Posted January 21, 2009 #54 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Yes, by using Jesus as your example. And the problem with that is.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacherman76 Posted January 22, 2009 Author #55 Share Posted January 22, 2009 You most certainly are. Ingrid Mattson is associated with Islamic Society of North America, which is linked to Hamas. That makes Mattson a terrorist. Obama is associated with Mattson. That makes Obama a terrorist. John Cornyn is associated with Obama. That makes Cornyn a terrorist. Elsa Murano is associated with Cornyn. That makes Murano a terrorist. I am associated with Murano. That makes me a terrorist. You are associated with me. That makes you a terrorist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacherman76 Posted January 22, 2009 Author #56 Share Posted January 22, 2009 (edited) I'm with Cradle of Fish on this one.... turn the other cheek? No Preacherman, Christian bloodlust has so much to account for. Jesus (if he was a real person) was just that ..... a person, not endowed with Jedi powers, just a good speaker. Islam recognises Jesus as a prophet - not the Messiah - Judaism recognises Jesus as a prophet not a Messiah - it is just the **EDIT** view of Christianity that recognises him as a Messiah. Look at the body-count as a result!!! **You don't need to bash other's beliefs to make a point** No they dont. What are you talking about? Edited January 22, 2009 by preacherman76 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted January 22, 2009 #57 Share Posted January 22, 2009 That's why you have to be careful with making judgments. They have a tendency of coming back to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacherman76 Posted January 22, 2009 Author #58 Share Posted January 22, 2009 That's why you have to be careful with making judgments. They have a tendency of coming back to you. If you call that rediculas comparison "coming back at me" I dont know what else to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted January 22, 2009 #59 Share Posted January 22, 2009 (edited) If you call that rediculas comparison "coming back at me" I dont know what else to say. You don't? I'll help you. According to you, guilt can be inferred by association. Aquatus1: What's the difference between a known terrorist and someone who has ties with a known terrorist? Preacherman, are you seriously asking a question like this? Are you so willing to condemn others that you are willing to do so on no other basis than association? Preacherman76: When it comes to politics absolutly If A is associated with B, and B is associated with C, then A equals C. So Mattson, being associated with the Islamic Society of North America, which is associated with Hamas, means that Mattson is a terrorist (because he associates with terrorists). You confirmed this in the above exchange. Everything else follows. If Mattson is a terrorist, then according to your logic of guilt by association, Obama is a terrorist. If Obama is a terrorist, then Cornyn is a terrorist (guilt by association). And so on. It's not ridiculous in the least. It's a perfectly logical extension of your somewhat less than logical claim that one is guilty by association. In the end, it comes back to you. You don't know what to say? Well, you have two options. You can point out the error in the above logical progression. Or, you can admit that the error was in your claim. Edited January 22, 2009 by aquatus1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander CMG Posted January 22, 2009 #60 Share Posted January 22, 2009 You most certainly are. Ingrid Mattson is associated with Islamic Society of North America, which is linked to Hamas. That makes Mattson a terrorist. Obama is associated with Mattson. That makes Obama a terrorist. John Cornyn is associated with Obama. That makes Cornyn a terrorist. Elsa Murano is associated with Cornyn. That makes Murano a terrorist. I am associated with Murano. That makes me a terrorist. You are associated with me. That makes you a terrorist. There are many levels of association directly or indirectly... However I personally feel that the topic of this discussion is irrelevant. If Obama is to succeed, indeed if any Leader is to succeed in there job, they wil have to shake many hands and associate themselves with may types of different individuals. I guess I myself am guilty of association directly and in-directly with known Terrorists am I a Terrorist.. Certainly not, not even by direct association. I don't know where this discussion would go... I don't care who Obama is associated with now or in the past/future as long as he does his job properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacherman76 Posted January 22, 2009 Author #61 Share Posted January 22, 2009 You don't? I'll help you. According to you, guilt can be inferred by association. If A is associated with B, and B is associated with C, then A equals C. So Mattson, being associated with the Islamic Society of North America, which is associated with Hamas, means that Mattson is a terrorist (because he associates with terrorists). You confirmed this in the above exchange. Everything else follows. If Mattson is a terrorist, then according to your logic of guilt by association, Obama is a terrorist. If Obama is a terrorist, then Cornyn is a terrorist (guilt by association). And so on. It's not ridiculous in the least. It's a perfectly logical extension of your somewhat less than logical claim that one is guilty by association. In the end, it comes back to you. You don't know what to say? Well, you have two options. You can point out the error in the above logical progression. Or, you can admit that the error was in your claim. I admit that Obama has no problem aligning himself with known terrorists. And it makes me question his true intentions as the president of the united states. If you cant see the problem with that, then you will, soon enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted January 22, 2009 #62 Share Posted January 22, 2009 I admit that Obama has no problem aligning himself with known terrorists. So you admit that you support guilt by association. You terrorist you And it makes me question his true intentions as the president of the united states. If you cant see the problem with that, then you will, soon enough. And if you can't see the lie that you are perpetuating, I will not be the slightest bit surprised. Heck, even if you were telling the truth, you would still fail at not being able to see the advantage of such a situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacherman76 Posted January 22, 2009 Author #63 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Twist it how ever you like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted January 22, 2009 #64 Share Posted January 22, 2009 You are saying that anyone associating with a terrorist can be considered a terrorist as well. If you cant see the problem with that, then I have a pretty good idea how you got your nickname. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Silver Thong Posted January 22, 2009 #65 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Twist it how ever you like. He's not twisting anything you are. He is using this as example to show you that you are the one that has things twisted in regards to Obama and his "terrorist" associations.. You don't see that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffybunny Posted January 22, 2009 #66 Share Posted January 22, 2009 There are many levels of association directly or indirectly... However I personally feel that the topic of this discussion is irrelevant. If Obama is to succeed, indeed if any Leader is to succeed in there job, they wil have to shake many hands and associate themselves with may types of different individuals. I guess I myself am guilty of association directly and in-directly with known Terrorists am I a Terrorist.. Certainly not, not even by direct association. I don't know where this discussion would go... I don't care who Obama is associated with now or in the past/future as long as he does his job properly. No kidding... Using that logic, every soldier(myself included) who has come face to face with an enemy combatant or "terrorist" for one cause or another is just by association a terrorist too. A whole lot of honorable men and women would fall under the definition of "terrorist" using that kind of silly definition. Wow. just wow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander CMG Posted January 22, 2009 #67 Share Posted January 22, 2009 No kidding... Using that logic, every soldier(myself included) who has come face to face with an enemy combatant or "terrorist" for one cause or another is just by association a terrorist too. A whole lot of honorable men and women would fall under the definition of "terrorist" using that kind of silly definition. Wow. just wow... Hey Fluffy, I am just trying to work this guilty by association thing out.. This is not my Logic ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Peter Venkman Posted January 22, 2009 #68 Share Posted January 22, 2009 JPost.com » International » Article Jan 18, 2009 7:05 | Updated Jan 18, 2009 7:06 Obama prayer leader linked to Hamas By ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON A Muslim scholar chosen to speak at President-elect Barack Obama's inaugural prayer service Wednesday is the leader of a group that federal prosecutors say has ties to terrorists. Ingrid Mattson. Photo: AP [file] Slideshow: Pictures of the week Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America, is one of many religious leaders scheduled to speak at the prayer service at Washington's National Cathedral. Mattson has been the guest of honor at State Department dinners and has met with senior Pentagon officials during the Bush administration. She also spoke at a prayer service at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. Mattson, who was elected president of the society in 2006, is a professor of Islamic studies at Hartford Seminary in Hartford, Connecticut. But in 2007 and as recently as last July, federal prosecutors in Dallas filed court documents linking the Plainfield, Indiana-based Islamic society to Hamas, which the US considers a terrorist organization. Neither Mattson nor her organization have been charged. But prosecutors wrote in July that they had "a wide array of testimonial and documentary evidence expressly linking" the group to Hamas and other radical groups. Linda Douglass, a spokeswoman for Obama's inaugural committee, would not discuss the case or say whether the committee knew about it. "She has a stellar reputation in the faith community," Douglass said Saturday night. The existence of the court documents was first reported by Politico. The Islamic Society of North America, which describes itself as "the nation's largest mainstream Muslim community-based organization," is fighting its inclusion on a list of co-conspirators in the Dallas terrorism case against the Holy Land Foundation. In court documents, Mattson's group says it does not condone terrorism. The court documents represent a complicated picture of the group. Law enforcement agencies have used the organization's annual convention as part of its outreach to the Muslim community. The group has provided religious training to the FBI, according to court documents. Karen Hughes, a former Bush confidant and under secretary of state, called Mattson "a wonderful leader and role model for many, many people." All this was going on while officials in the law enforcement and intelligence community apparently had evidence that the Islamic Society of North America had ties to terrorists and to the Holy Land Foundation. That foundation and five of its former leaders were convicted at a retrial in November of funneling millions of dollars to Hamas. The Islamic Society helps certify Muslim chaplains for federal prisons. Mattson leads a program at the Hartford Seminary that trains Muslim chaplains for the US military. Mattson was one of about three dozen leaders, including former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, and two former Republican congressmen, Vin Weber and Steve Bartlett, who developed a report released last fall on how the US can fight extremism in the Muslim world. This woman hasn't even been charged with anything man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted January 22, 2009 #69 Share Posted January 22, 2009 (edited) I'm pretty sure Fluffy's agreeing with you, Ohelemapit. Edited January 22, 2009 by aquatus1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted January 22, 2009 #70 Share Posted January 22, 2009 This woman hasn't even been charged with anything man. No, she hasn't. She is the president of the Islamic Society of North America, which has been linked to the Hamas. That's as close as she comes to being a terrorist. For some people, that's enough. Of course, when you think about, it would be pretty hard for an Islamic group to do business in Islamic communities without having links. That's like trying to work in New York's ChinaTown without having any ties to the Triad, or trying to service the North Ireland region without having ties to the IRA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithisco Posted January 22, 2009 #71 Share Posted January 22, 2009 (edited) What a "crock" Preacherman You know full well that if there was even the slightest hint of "terrorist" associations then she would have been in Guantanamo a long time ago - without charges and no evidence produced. Your "my God is better than your God" stance is tiresome at the least - and mighty dangerous at the worst. You need to get out more - before judging people because they have a different belief to you ask yourself just what murderous wars and invasions have had the backing of your God-belief?? You are peddling inflammatory, intolerant, an inexcusable nonsense Edited January 22, 2009 by keithisco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander CMG Posted January 22, 2009 #72 Share Posted January 22, 2009 I'm pretty sure Fluffy's agreeing with you, Ohelemapit. Yes sorry, I read it quickly on my way out to football training on got the wrong end of the stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffybunny Posted January 23, 2009 #73 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Hey Fluffy, I am just trying to work this guilty by association thing out.. This is not my Logic ? Sorry, it was a long day and I just had another back surgery so with the meds they have me on...I am not running on all cylinders. I had really been trying to agree with you, but it got muddled there. it's a bad day...sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander CMG Posted January 23, 2009 #74 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Sorry, it was a long day and I just had another back surgery so with the meds they have me on...I am not running on all cylinders. I had really been trying to agree with you, but it got muddled there. it's a bad day...sorry. No appologies necessary... Hope the back works itself out quickly and it is not too serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InHuman Posted January 23, 2009 #75 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Such polite young lads you are.... It makes my ancient cold heart grow a few sizes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now