[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]once again

Once again, dan, you fail to understand that I am only telling what the jihadists say and what they are basing it on. To say that I hold those same sentiments and to again call me a bigot is very dishonest of you.
[/quote]
Well am I being dishonest or have I failed to understand?

You need to keep up with yourself here.

The sentiment that I say you hold is the one that you have said you hold.

[quote=surveyor]I think you should start reading the koran. The current problems we have with islamofacism is due to the calls to islamic supremacy that is within the koran, and hadiths. This islamic supremacy actually does fit the definition of ideology. All muslims are required, per the koran, to wage war against the unbelievers. Luckily, not all muslims are interested in waging war, but they are required to do so.
(and PLEASE don’t try to use the argument that the bible/christianity is just as violent as the koran/islam. You would be devastatingly wrong.)
[/quote]

Remember that one?

By describing a world religion as inherently warlike and all pious followers as violent, you have made a bigoted statement.

I don’t think calling a spade a spade (or a bigot a bigot makes me look bad).

[quote=surveyor]
But you can call me a bigot all you want it doesn’t change what the jihadists have been saying or doing.

It’s similar to calling a cop or a reporter a serial killer when the cop or reporter is just describing the motivations and the origins of the serial killer.

But you know, you can’t dispute the facts, so you attack the person. Ad hominem. But like I say, it does not change the facts of the story nor does it change the validity of my arguments.[/quote]
I don’t really get what your “facts” are.

You have stated that the dude from Mt. Hood is a terrorist based upon a broad collection of anecdotes and pasted together along with a lot of debate-club rehash to intimidate dissent.

Weak but entertaining.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]once again

Once again, dan, you fail to understand that I am only telling what the jihadists say and what they are basing it on. To say that I hold those same sentiments and to again call me a bigot is very dishonest of you.
[/quote]
Well am I being dishonest or have I failed to understand?

You need to keep up with yourself here.

The sentiment that I say you hold is the one that you have said you hold.

[quote=surveyor]I think you should start reading the koran. The current problems we have with islamofacism is due to the calls to islamic supremacy that is within the koran, and hadiths. This islamic supremacy actually does fit the definition of ideology. All muslims are required, per the koran, to wage war against the unbelievers. Luckily, not all muslims are interested in waging war, but they are required to do so.
(and PLEASE don’t try to use the argument that the bible/christianity is just as violent as the koran/islam. You would be devastatingly wrong.)
[/quote]

Remember that one?

By describing a world religion as inherently warlike and all pious followers as violent, you have made a bigoted statement.

I don’t think calling a spade a spade (or a bigot a bigot makes me look bad).

[quote=surveyor]
But you can call me a bigot all you want it doesn’t change what the jihadists have been saying or doing.

It’s similar to calling a cop or a reporter a serial killer when the cop or reporter is just describing the motivations and the origins of the serial killer.

But you know, you can’t dispute the facts, so you attack the person. Ad hominem. But like I say, it does not change the facts of the story nor does it change the validity of my arguments.[/quote]
I don’t really get what your “facts” are.

You have stated that the dude from Mt. Hood is a terrorist based upon a broad collection of anecdotes and pasted together along with a lot of debate-club rehash to intimidate dissent.

Weak but entertaining.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]russell:

It would be a mistake to characterize my reporting of the facts on the characteristics, beginnings, and development of a jihadist as an approval of the treatment of Japanese Americans in World War II (or any indiscriminate treatment of individuals due to their color, creed or religion).

I have never advocated that position before, now, or ever, especially as an Asian American myself.[/quote]

Bigoted minority.
Love it.

I can spell hypocrite too.

I find it interesting that you claim to not “partake in indiscriminate treatment… due to …religion” yet say things about a religion which are inaccurate and ascribe motivations to individuals based on those assertions.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]russell:

It would be a mistake to characterize my reporting of the facts on the characteristics, beginnings, and development of a jihadist as an approval of the treatment of Japanese Americans in World War II (or any indiscriminate treatment of individuals due to their color, creed or religion).

I have never advocated that position before, now, or ever, especially as an Asian American myself.[/quote]

Bigoted minority.
Love it.

I can spell hypocrite too.

I find it interesting that you claim to not “partake in indiscriminate treatment… due to …religion” yet say things about a religion which are inaccurate and ascribe motivations to individuals based on those assertions.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]russell:

It would be a mistake to characterize my reporting of the facts on the characteristics, beginnings, and development of a jihadist as an approval of the treatment of Japanese Americans in World War II (or any indiscriminate treatment of individuals due to their color, creed or religion).

I have never advocated that position before, now, or ever, especially as an Asian American myself.[/quote]

Bigoted minority.
Love it.

I can spell hypocrite too.

I find it interesting that you claim to not “partake in indiscriminate treatment… due to …religion” yet say things about a religion which are inaccurate and ascribe motivations to individuals based on those assertions.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]russell:

It would be a mistake to characterize my reporting of the facts on the characteristics, beginnings, and development of a jihadist as an approval of the treatment of Japanese Americans in World War II (or any indiscriminate treatment of individuals due to their color, creed or religion).

I have never advocated that position before, now, or ever, especially as an Asian American myself.[/quote]

Bigoted minority.
Love it.

I can spell hypocrite too.

I find it interesting that you claim to not “partake in indiscriminate treatment… due to …religion” yet say things about a religion which are inaccurate and ascribe motivations to individuals based on those assertions.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]russell:

It would be a mistake to characterize my reporting of the facts on the characteristics, beginnings, and development of a jihadist as an approval of the treatment of Japanese Americans in World War II (or any indiscriminate treatment of individuals due to their color, creed or religion).

I have never advocated that position before, now, or ever, especially as an Asian American myself.[/quote]

Bigoted minority.
Love it.

I can spell hypocrite too.

I find it interesting that you claim to not “partake in indiscriminate treatment… due to …religion” yet say things about a religion which are inaccurate and ascribe motivations to individuals based on those assertions.

[urbanrealtor]

Yeah Poway Seller is my sister and Marion is my wife.

Also, Allan is my secret lover.

I am arguably a troll and you are correct that I am married to a teacher (I actually think I have said that before).

I stand by what I said.

You said:
[quote=CDMA ENG]
————————————————-
Sorry man… But only 50 percent of all people that enter an engineering program make it out… I dare say the drop out ratio for teaching isn’t the same and if it is its due to lack of commitment and not subject matter.
[/quote]
Translation:
50% of engineers don’t hack it and drop out.
Its because engineering is so hard.
Teachers likely drop out less.
But even if its the same amount its because they are uncommitted.
Thats because teaching is not hard enough to cause people to drop.
Only engineering is that hard.

My response:
That is a pretty silly argument.
It basically says that
-getting frustrated and quitting engineering is due to it being such a tough field.
-getting frustrated and quitting teaching is due to personal character failures.

[quote=CDMA ENG]
You cant sit there and tell me one is just as difficult academically (which I probably just misspelled) as the other. Plus… Many engineers study there subject matter constantly… They are in “training” everyday… I read and re-read all the time. I don’t have to have formalized training the training comes from working with very unique problems everyday.
[/quote]
Translation:
Engineering is much harder than teaching.
Engineers have to keep up their skill sets and renew their knowledge base.
Engineers have to apply their skills in different ways every day.

My response:
I think that the last 2 statements apply to teachers as well.
I defy anyone to prove otherwise.
This is a false dichotomy.

With regard to denying that the act of teaching is “academic”:
If we actually take teaching (which is by definition a social enterprise) seriously as a course of study, then yes, I believe that the social interface part is valid in being considered an academic study.
It is true that teachers do not need the same course of study as an engineer. If they did then they would be engineers.

And yeah I acknowledge your condescending faux-appreciation of teachers.

Just kind of makes you a hypocrite.

Go play in traffic yourself.

Hope ya get hit.

[urbanrealtor]

Yeah Poway Seller is my sister and Marion is my wife.

Also, Allan is my secret lover.

I am arguably a troll and you are correct that I am married to a teacher (I actually think I have said that before).

I stand by what I said.

You said:
[quote=CDMA ENG]
————————————————-
Sorry man… But only 50 percent of all people that enter an engineering program make it out… I dare say the drop out ratio for teaching isn’t the same and if it is its due to lack of commitment and not subject matter.
[/quote]
Translation:
50% of engineers don’t hack it and drop out.
Its because engineering is so hard.
Teachers likely drop out less.
But even if its the same amount its because they are uncommitted.
Thats because teaching is not hard enough to cause people to drop.
Only engineering is that hard.

My response:
That is a pretty silly argument.
It basically says that
-getting frustrated and quitting engineering is due to it being such a tough field.
-getting frustrated and quitting teaching is due to personal character failures.

[quote=CDMA ENG]
You cant sit there and tell me one is just as difficult academically (which I probably just misspelled) as the other. Plus… Many engineers study there subject matter constantly… They are in “training” everyday… I read and re-read all the time. I don’t have to have formalized training the training comes from working with very unique problems everyday.
[/quote]
Translation:
Engineering is much harder than teaching.
Engineers have to keep up their skill sets and renew their knowledge base.
Engineers have to apply their skills in different ways every day.

My response:
I think that the last 2 statements apply to teachers as well.
I defy anyone to prove otherwise.
This is a false dichotomy.

With regard to denying that the act of teaching is “academic”:
If we actually take teaching (which is by definition a social enterprise) seriously as a course of study, then yes, I believe that the social interface part is valid in being considered an academic study.
It is true that teachers do not need the same course of study as an engineer. If they did then they would be engineers.

And yeah I acknowledge your condescending faux-appreciation of teachers.

Just kind of makes you a hypocrite.

Go play in traffic yourself.

Hope ya get hit.

[urbanrealtor]

Yeah Poway Seller is my sister and Marion is my wife.

Also, Allan is my secret lover.

I am arguably a troll and you are correct that I am married to a teacher (I actually think I have said that before).

I stand by what I said.

You said:
[quote=CDMA ENG]
————————————————-
Sorry man… But only 50 percent of all people that enter an engineering program make it out… I dare say the drop out ratio for teaching isn’t the same and if it is its due to lack of commitment and not subject matter.
[/quote]
Translation:
50% of engineers don’t hack it and drop out.
Its because engineering is so hard.
Teachers likely drop out less.
But even if its the same amount its because they are uncommitted.
Thats because teaching is not hard enough to cause people to drop.
Only engineering is that hard.

My response:
That is a pretty silly argument.
It basically says that
-getting frustrated and quitting engineering is due to it being such a tough field.
-getting frustrated and quitting teaching is due to personal character failures.

[quote=CDMA ENG]
You cant sit there and tell me one is just as difficult academically (which I probably just misspelled) as the other. Plus… Many engineers study there subject matter constantly… They are in “training” everyday… I read and re-read all the time. I don’t have to have formalized training the training comes from working with very unique problems everyday.
[/quote]
Translation:
Engineering is much harder than teaching.
Engineers have to keep up their skill sets and renew their knowledge base.
Engineers have to apply their skills in different ways every day.

My response:
I think that the last 2 statements apply to teachers as well.
I defy anyone to prove otherwise.
This is a false dichotomy.

With regard to denying that the act of teaching is “academic”:
If we actually take teaching (which is by definition a social enterprise) seriously as a course of study, then yes, I believe that the social interface part is valid in being considered an academic study.
It is true that teachers do not need the same course of study as an engineer. If they did then they would be engineers.

And yeah I acknowledge your condescending faux-appreciation of teachers.

Just kind of makes you a hypocrite.

Go play in traffic yourself.

Hope ya get hit.

[urbanrealtor]

Yeah Poway Seller is my sister and Marion is my wife.

Also, Allan is my secret lover.

I am arguably a troll and you are correct that I am married to a teacher (I actually think I have said that before).

I stand by what I said.

You said:
[quote=CDMA ENG]
————————————————-
Sorry man… But only 50 percent of all people that enter an engineering program make it out… I dare say the drop out ratio for teaching isn’t the same and if it is its due to lack of commitment and not subject matter.
[/quote]
Translation:
50% of engineers don’t hack it and drop out.
Its because engineering is so hard.
Teachers likely drop out less.
But even if its the same amount its because they are uncommitted.
Thats because teaching is not hard enough to cause people to drop.
Only engineering is that hard.

My response:
That is a pretty silly argument.
It basically says that
-getting frustrated and quitting engineering is due to it being such a tough field.
-getting frustrated and quitting teaching is due to personal character failures.

[quote=CDMA ENG]
You cant sit there and tell me one is just as difficult academically (which I probably just misspelled) as the other. Plus… Many engineers study there subject matter constantly… They are in “training” everyday… I read and re-read all the time. I don’t have to have formalized training the training comes from working with very unique problems everyday.
[/quote]
Translation:
Engineering is much harder than teaching.
Engineers have to keep up their skill sets and renew their knowledge base.
Engineers have to apply their skills in different ways every day.

My response:
I think that the last 2 statements apply to teachers as well.
I defy anyone to prove otherwise.
This is a false dichotomy.

With regard to denying that the act of teaching is “academic”:
If we actually take teaching (which is by definition a social enterprise) seriously as a course of study, then yes, I believe that the social interface part is valid in being considered an academic study.
It is true that teachers do not need the same course of study as an engineer. If they did then they would be engineers.

And yeah I acknowledge your condescending faux-appreciation of teachers.

Just kind of makes you a hypocrite.

Go play in traffic yourself.

Hope ya get hit.

[urbanrealtor]

Yeah Poway Seller is my sister and Marion is my wife.

Also, Allan is my secret lover.

I am arguably a troll and you are correct that I am married to a teacher (I actually think I have said that before).

I stand by what I said.

You said:
[quote=CDMA ENG]
————————————————-
Sorry man… But only 50 percent of all people that enter an engineering program make it out… I dare say the drop out ratio for teaching isn’t the same and if it is its due to lack of commitment and not subject matter.
[/quote]
Translation:
50% of engineers don’t hack it and drop out.
Its because engineering is so hard.
Teachers likely drop out less.
But even if its the same amount its because they are uncommitted.
Thats because teaching is not hard enough to cause people to drop.
Only engineering is that hard.

My response:
That is a pretty silly argument.
It basically says that
-getting frustrated and quitting engineering is due to it being such a tough field.
-getting frustrated and quitting teaching is due to personal character failures.

[quote=CDMA ENG]
You cant sit there and tell me one is just as difficult academically (which I probably just misspelled) as the other. Plus… Many engineers study there subject matter constantly… They are in “training” everyday… I read and re-read all the time. I don’t have to have formalized training the training comes from working with very unique problems everyday.
[/quote]
Translation:
Engineering is much harder than teaching.
Engineers have to keep up their skill sets and renew their knowledge base.
Engineers have to apply their skills in different ways every day.

My response:
I think that the last 2 statements apply to teachers as well.
I defy anyone to prove otherwise.
This is a false dichotomy.

With regard to denying that the act of teaching is “academic”:
If we actually take teaching (which is by definition a social enterprise) seriously as a course of study, then yes, I believe that the social interface part is valid in being considered an academic study.
It is true that teachers do not need the same course of study as an engineer. If they did then they would be engineers.

And yeah I acknowledge your condescending faux-appreciation of teachers.

Just kind of makes you a hypocrite.

Go play in traffic yourself.

Hope ya get hit.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]blinders

I don’t believe the CIA let it happen. I surmise that they, like you Arraya, didn’t want to give credence to the idea that he, as a muslim, could be more susceptible to jihadist philosophy than a christian and they did not analyze or care to understand how the core teachings of Islam can lead one to jihadism.

That’s how I feel.

There is evidence for my hypothesis. There is zero evidence for yours. When this situation happens, the one with zero is the whack job.[/quote]

Yeah.
Compared to you she looks like a real whack job.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]blinders

I don’t believe the CIA let it happen. I surmise that they, like you Arraya, didn’t want to give credence to the idea that he, as a muslim, could be more susceptible to jihadist philosophy than a christian and they did not analyze or care to understand how the core teachings of Islam can lead one to jihadism.

That’s how I feel.

There is evidence for my hypothesis. There is zero evidence for yours. When this situation happens, the one with zero is the whack job.[/quote]

Yeah.
Compared to you she looks like a real whack job.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]blinders

I don’t believe the CIA let it happen. I surmise that they, like you Arraya, didn’t want to give credence to the idea that he, as a muslim, could be more susceptible to jihadist philosophy than a christian and they did not analyze or care to understand how the core teachings of Islam can lead one to jihadism.

That’s how I feel.

There is evidence for my hypothesis. There is zero evidence for yours. When this situation happens, the one with zero is the whack job.[/quote]

Yeah.
Compared to you she looks like a real whack job.

[Author]

Posts