Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Common Interests Terror Plot Foiled

Originally posted by muntus:

---

Originally posted by Pete D:

---

Welcome to the United States of Fascism?

---

So we defend against Islamo-fascism and we're the ones who are the fascists?

---

Originally posted by muntus:

---

They create terror through death. Terror without death is not their goal. If indeed terror, even without death, was their ultimate goal(which it isn't), they would all study computer programming, acquire jobs in every sector they could, and unleash an electronic assault in order to shut down communications, banking, internet, and power grids. That would inflict more terror than blowing up planes.

So why the samll scale terror(blowing up planes instead of shutting down the continent)? Their ultimate goal is to kill the infidels. Terror is a nice by-product.

---

Quote:

---

Sigma,
Jesus Christ, put the profiling thing to rest. It's stupid.

---

Quote:

---

Sigma,
I guess "we" only implies Christian-Americans.

---

Quote:

---

Sigma,
Because, you know, there are millions of Muslim-Americans in this country too that would have their lives altered in some way using your great idea.
So I guess the terrorist would still "have won".

---

Quote:

---

Sigma,
I thought you were just ignorant which I could blame you for but apparently you're just a [censored] moron, and that's not your fault, it's just the way God made you. Let me know when you want to actually have an intelligent discussion presuming that's something that you're at least capable of doing. I long for something outside of your poorly-composed "anyone that disagrees with me must be a Liberal" responses.

Secondly, You must be more stupid than I thought. Does your reading comprehension suffer when sentences extended beyond 10 words? Would it help if I broke my admittedly long-winded posts into chapters so you have time for a juice break? I'd actually create a bulleted list of what my "better ideas" (IMHO) were, but at this point I'm not sure you would actually read and understand it nor do I think I could draw enough pretty pictures to help you out.

---

Quote:

---

Sigma,
Like I said, profiling works when you know what you're looking for.

---

Originally posted by jthursby:

---

Quote:

---

Sigma,
Jesus Christ, put the profiling thing to rest. It's stupid.

---

Then when that method didn���?�t work but for one or two people, he resorted to sarcasm.

Quote:

---

Sigma,
I guess "we" only implies Christian-Americans.

---

When he knew EXACTLY what I meant by the statement.
And then more sarcasm instead of ideas.

Quote:

---

Sigma,
Because, you know, there are millions of Muslim-Americans in this country too that would have their lives altered in some way using your great idea.
So I guess the terrorist would still "have won".

---

---

Um, that wasn't sarcasm.

Your "idea" was that we should yank out all Muslims as part of your "profiling" so that "we", as Americans, would not "have our lives altered in any way" by having to go through extra security.

That statement totally ignores the fact that you would be "altering the lives" of millions of Muslim-Americans with your "idea".

Hence my question if by "we", in the "we should not have our lives altered" referred to just Christian-Americans (though I suppose "non-Muslim-Americans" would have been a better description).

If your line of logic is that "if we alter an American's life the terrorists have won" then simply be executing your plan the terrorists have "won" because there's always going to be some innocent American who will be slightly inconvenienced by any change in security protocols.

Originally posted by jthursby:

---

Then we change our previous statement but add something to make it look not quite as hypocritical as it should.

Quote:

---

Sigma,
Like I said, profiling works when you know what you're looking for.

---

Which is it? "Jesus Christ, put the profiling thing to rest its stupid", or "Like I said, profiling works when you know what you're looking for"

---

The whole cut-and-paste out-of-context thing. The first quote was made in regards to the type of profiling suggested here. The "if we just look at every Muslim we're bound to catch them all" mentality. The second quote is in reference to the type of profiling that actually does something; as said in the quote -- profiling when you know what you're looking for.

I didn't change anything. I said that profiling works when you know what you're looking for WAY early in my posts. Hence the "Like I said" in the post that you quoted, that was referring to an earlier post.

Have you not yet figured out the difference between the type of profiling suggested in this thread by the likes of you and the type of profiling that actually gets things done? I don't know how else to make it any clearer for you. You seem to be the only one that doesn't get it.

Originally posted by sigma:

---

Originally posted by jthursby:

---

Quote:

---

Sigma,
Jesus Christ, put the profiling thing to rest. It's stupid.

---

Then when that method didn���?�t work but for one or two people, he resorted to sarcasm.

Quote:

---

Sigma,
I guess "we" only implies Christian-Americans.

---

When he knew EXACTLY what I meant by the statement.
And then more sarcasm instead of ideas.

Quote:

---

Sigma,
Because, you know, there are millions of Muslim-Americans in this country too that would have their lives altered in some way using your great idea.
So I guess the terrorist would still "have won".

---

---

Um, that wasn't sarcasm.

Your "idea" was that we should yank out all Muslims as part of your "profiling" so that "we", as Americans, would not "have our lives altered in any way" by having to go through extra security.

That statement totally ignores the fact that you would be "altering the lives" of millions of Muslim-Americans with your "idea".

Hence my question if by "we", in the "we should not have our lives altered" referred to just Christian-Americans (though I suppose "non-Muslim-Americans" would have been a better description).

If your line of logic is that "if we alter an American's life the terrorists have won" then simply be executing your plan the terrorists have "won" because there's always going to be some innocent American who will be slightly inconvenienced by any change in security protocols.

Originally posted by jthursby:

---

Then we change our previous statement but add something to make it look not quite as hypocritical as it should.

Quote:

---

Sigma,
Like I said, profiling works when you know what you're looking for.

---

Which is it? "Jesus Christ, put the profiling thing to rest its stupid", or "Like I said, profiling works when you know what you're looking for"

---

The whole cut-and-paste out-of-context thing. The first quote was made in regards to the type of profiling suggested here. The "if we just look at every Muslim we're bound to catch them all" mentality. The second quote is in reference to the type of profiling that actually does something; as said in the quote -- profiling when you know what you're looking for.

I didn't change anything. I said that profiling works when you know what you're looking for WAY early in my posts. Hence the "Like I said" in the post that you quoted, that was referring to an earlier post.

Have you not yet figured out the difference between the type of profiling suggested in this thread by the likes of you and the type of profiling that actually gets things done? I don't know how else to make it any clearer for you. You seem to be the only one that doesn't get it.

---

Quote:

---

I get it just fine, I have from the start. We were both talking about profiling in one way shape or form. Your arrogance must block your powers of deduction. One word my friend, Hypocrite. You can twist it any way you want. Make whatever snide comments you like about my ability to read and understand your bombastic literary. We were probably closer in idea than than you thought, had you cared to look. I'm done.

Jim T.

---