PDA

View Full Version : Obama administration pulls references to Islam from terror training materials, offici



Odysseus
10-27-2011, 10:53 AM
Published: 12:33 AM 10/21/2011 | Updated: 4:56 PM 10/21/2011
By Kenneth Timmerman

Deputy U.S. Attorney General James Cole confirmed on Wednesday that the Obama administration was pulling back all training materials used for the law enforcement and national security communities, in order to eliminate all references to Islam that some Muslim groups have claimed are offensive.

“I recently directed all components of the Department of Justice to re-evaluate their training efforts in a range of areas, from community outreach to national security,” Cole told a panel at the George Washington University law school.

The move comes after complaints from advocacy organizations including the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and others identified as Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the 2004 Holy Land Foundation terror fundraising trial.

In a Wednesday Los Angeles Times op-ed, Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) president Salam al-Marayati threatened the FBI with a total cutoff of cooperation between American Muslims and law enforcement if the agency failed to revise its law enforcement training materials.

Maintaining the training materials in their current state “will undermine the relationship between law enforcement and the Muslim American community,” al-Marayati wrote.

Multiple online sources detail MPAC’s close alignment with CAIR.

In his op-ed, Al-Marayati demanded that the Justice Department and the FBI “issue a clear and unequivocal apology to the Muslim American community” and “establish a thorough and transparent vetting process in selecting its trainers and materials.”

Specifically, al-Marayati called for a new “interagency task force” to review the training materials — a task force including representatives of the Islamist organizations the FBI is tasked with monitoring.

Some believe the Obama administration’s Justice Department will go even further.

“The Attorney General has announced what sounds like reprogramming if they find people who have actually received training” that Islamist groups find objectionable, Center for Security Policy president Frank Gaffney told The Daily Caller. Gaffney is co-author of a report, published by the Center, titled “Sharia: The Threat to America.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/21/obama-administration-pulls-references-to-islam-from-terror-training-materials-official-says/#ixzz1bzgbmDbb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A single representative of a Muslim Brotherhood front threatens a cutoff of cooperation in an OPED, and the administration recalls millions of dollars worth of materials to censor them? This is beyond idiotic.

txradioguy
10-27-2011, 10:58 AM
Should have known CAIR...the unnamed co-conspirator was involved in this crap.

God forbid we include in training manuals EXACTLY who is fomenting terrorism around the world these days.

Novaheart
10-27-2011, 11:05 AM
Islamic terrorists.

Illegal aliens.

make the tshirt and i will wear it

Rockntractor
10-27-2011, 11:38 AM
Islamic terrorists.

Illegal aliens.

make the tshirt and i will wear it

You may be with us on this issue but you are supporting the liberals in so many other things, you elect them to office and enable them to pull this crap and then wonder why they do these things. You are part of the problem.

Witmaster
10-27-2011, 12:00 PM
Hell this shouldn’t come as a surprise. We all saw this train coming when he changed the name from “War on Terror” to “Overseas Contingency Operations”.

With the way things are going it shouldn’t be too far off when I’m ordered to leave Afghanistan and leave my rifle on my bunk with a hand-written apology note.

Odysseus
10-27-2011, 01:45 PM
You may be with us on this issue but you are supporting the liberals in so many other things, you elect them to office and enable them to pull this crap and then wonder why they do these things. You are part of the problem.
Nova has decided that politicians who vote for gay marriage and gays in the military are worth supporting, even if they also vote to defund the military and give aid and comfort to our enemies. Eventually, when they have had their way, we will be like Amsterdam, with enclaves openly gay folks celebrating their lifestyle, but who dare not leave their homes because of the Sharia-enforcing gangs that the Dhimmi-crats will not have the stones to confront.


Hell this shouldn’t come as a surprise. We all saw this train coming when he changed the name from “War on Terror” to “Overseas Contingency Operations”.

With the way things are going it shouldn’t be too far off when I’m ordered to leave Afghanistan and leave my rifle on my bunk with a hand-written apology note.

I promise you that no officer will ask you to leave a hand-written apology note. We'll expect you to do it in MS Word and run the spell-check before you print it and sign it. :D

noonwitch
10-27-2011, 03:02 PM
I'd have to see what they are removing from their training materials before I make any further judgement. Like, what specifically in the materials is considered offensive by american muslims and whether that information is really crucial to anti-terrorism training.

Odysseus
10-27-2011, 03:33 PM
I'd have to see what they are removing from their training materials before I make any further judgement. Like, what specifically in the materials is considered offensive by american muslims and whether that information is really crucial to anti-terrorism training.

It's not American Muslims who find it offensive, it's CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood who find the data too revealing. Here is the OPED in full, with my commentary in blue:


The wrong way to fight terrorism
Law enforcement and intelligence agencies' continued use of anti-Muslim training materials could lead to the collapse of a critical partnership with the Muslim American community.

By Salam Al-Marayati

October 19, 2011
We in the Muslim American community have been battling the corrupt and bankrupt ideas of cults such as Al Qaeda. Now it seems we also have to battle pseudo-experts in the FBI and the Department of Justice.

A disturbing string of training material used by the FBI and a U.S. attorney's office came to light beginning in late July that reveals a deep anti-Muslim sentiment within the U.S. government.

If this matter is not immediately addressed, it will undermine the relationship between law enforcement and the Muslim American community — another example of the ineptitude and/or apathy undermining bridges built with care over decades. It is not enough to just call it a "very valid concern," as FBI Director Robert Mueller told a congressional committee this month.

The training material in question provided to FBI agents at the academy in Quantico, Va. — as first reported by Wired magazine's Danger Room blog — contained bigoted and inflammatory views on Muslims, including claims that "devout" Muslims are more prone toward violence, that Islam aims to "transform a country's culture into 7th century Arabian ways," that Islamic charitable giving is a "funding mechanism for combat" and that the prophet Muhammad was a "violent cult leader."
The lack of context for these quotes makes them unreliable. For example, does the material state that "devout" Muslims are more prone toward violence, or does it say that devout adherents of some sects are prone to violence (such as Salalifst and Wahhabis)? From the next quote, about the desire to transform the culture to the 7th century Arabian standard, we know that this is true for Salafists, Wahhabis and members of the Muslim Brotherhood, who subscribe to these ideas. Zakat is a funding mechanism for jihad. Numerous Islamic scholars have stated this. As for Mohammed being a violent cult leader, has this guy read the Qur'an? Mohammed's violence is well-documented, and it's hard to find a better example of a cult than the early Muslims in Medina.

Wired also found a 2010 presentation by an analyst working for the U.S. attorney's office in Pennsylvania that warns of a " 'Civilizational Jihad' stretching back from the dawn of Islam and waged today in the U.S. by 'civilians, juries, lawyers, media, academia and charities' who threaten 'our values.' The goal of that war: 'Replacement of American Judeo-Christian and Western liberal social, political and religious foundations by Islam.'"Well, yeah. What's your point?

Such baseless and inflammatory claims shall best be left to those few who share Al Qaeda's agenda of keeping America in a perpetual state of war with Islam. In other words, the rhetoric of Al Qaeda and these law enforcement trainers are opposite sides of the same coin of hate.Nice try, that. But the fact is that the claims are not baseless. The Muslim Brotherhood has explicitly stated that those are their goals, and a majority of American Mosques disseminate literature in which those goals are also endorsed.

If our law enforcement and intelligence agencies continue to use incorrect and divisive training literature, the crucial partnership between the Muslim American community and law enforcement will slowly disintegrate. According to the Muslim Public Affairs Council's Post-9/11 Terrorism Incident Database, these partnerships have proved effective in keeping our nation safe. Nearly 40% of Al Qaeda-related plots threatening the American homeland since 9/11 have been foiled thanks to tips from Muslims.Translation: Keep telling the truth about us and we'll stop pretending to tell the truth to you.

One example of this is the so-called Virginia 5 case in 2009, in which information from the Muslim community in Virginia led to the arrest in Pakistan of five Muslims from Virginia who were trying to join an Al Qaeda group. Last year, in another case, members of a Maryland community warned law enforcement about Antonio Martinez, who had recently converted to Islam. He was subsequently arrested after he allegedly tried to blow up a military recruitment center.

More important, Muslim leaders, not FBI agents, can more effectively battle Al Qaeda's destructive ideas.Yes, but al Qaeda isn't exactly the only game in town. The Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR and the other various fronts seek to undermine the US through colonization and stealth jihad. Towards that end, it's in the interest of the front groups to betray the most violent plotters in order to creat the illusion of assimilation and cooperation. Meanwhile, they continue to advance Islam through sedition.

I have worked for more than 20 years with law enforcement and Muslim American communities, and one of the biggest consequences of these training sessions and use of this material is the setback of a vital relationship that required years to build. I know justifiable criticism can be levied against some Muslim leaders in America for not aggressively promoting civic engagement, for not being self-critical enough and for not distancing themselves from rabble-rousers. But how can we persuade Muslim American communities to stay at the table when the food on the table is filled with poison?Just which Muslim leaders are you willing to name as being uncooperative?

These training manuals are making it more difficult for Muslim Americans to foster any trust with law enforcement agencies. Biased and faulty training leads to biased and faulty policing.

The real challenge now is getting the partnership back on track, and for the FBI and the Justice Department to take the following steps: issue a clear and unequivocal apology to the Muslim American community; establish a thorough and transparent vetting process in selecting its trainers and materials; invite experts who have no animosity toward any religion to conduct training about any religious community to law enforcement. Finally, the White House needs to form an interagency task force that can conduct an independent review of FBI and Justice Department training material.

The following words are etched into the walls of the FBI headquarters building in Washington: "The most effective weapon against crime is cooperation … of all law enforcement agencies with the support and understanding of the American people."

Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. and FBI Director Mueller, take some leadership on this matter, or the partnership we've built to counter violent extremism will forever be handicapped. The question you have to answer is simple: Are we on the same team or not?Well, you might be on the same team as Holder, since he can't even bring himself to say the words "Islam" and "terrorism" in the same sentence, but you're not on America's side in the Sharia War that we are now fighting.

Salam Al-Marayati is president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council. A CAIR affiliated front for the Muslim Brotherhood and an active proponent of stealth jihad.

Novaheart
10-27-2011, 11:54 PM
You may be with us on this issue but you are supporting the liberals in so many other things, you elect them to office and enable them to pull this crap and then wonder why they do these things. You are part of the problem.

Yeah well, we all make compromises. If the GOP politicians could find their spines when corporate or religious thugs show up at Congressional offices, then maybe I could vote for more of them.

I voted for Obama because I believed that he would lay the groundwork for National Single Payer, and he has. I have also predicted from the very start, that the signature on National Single Payer would be Republican. We'll see.

Novaheart
10-28-2011, 12:05 AM
Nova has decided that politicians who vote for gay marriage and gays in the military are worth supporting,

Actually, single payer health care is my first priority. As some have pointed out tireless and stupidly, we came into 2008 with about 80% of the work done on civil rights for gay people. Marriage is a cause for equality sakes, but it's a stupid thing to do unless there are children involved, and maybe even then. Why in God's name would you want to make a single financial and legal unit out of two people, when there are some serious advantages to remaining unlegallymarried? The military thing was a bit different because it affect the lives and opportunities available to young people plus it has to do with the constitution, and we have discussed it to death, so let's leave it.



........ even if they also vote to defund the military and give aid and comfort to our enemies.

Um, yeah, right.



Eventually, when they have had their way, we will be like Amsterdam........

Enough with your babble, not every liberal is a sympathizer with Hamas, and not every conservative is a noble creature who wouldn't sell out his own country, Rex Tillerman, for the price of a barrel of oil.

Witmaster
10-28-2011, 03:54 AM
I promise you that no officer will ask you to leave a hand-written apology note. We'll expect you to do it in MS Word and run the spell-check before you print it and sign it. :DLOL!!

I figured there would be a required ConOp in powerpoint and a 5-para OpOrd somewhere in the mix.

Odysseus
10-28-2011, 08:30 AM
I voted for Obama because I believed that he would lay the groundwork for National Single Payer, and he has. I have also predicted from the very start, that the signature on National Single Payer would be Republican. We'll see.
Well, the signature on repeal will certainly be Republican.

Actually, single payer health care is my first priority. As some have pointed out tireless and stupidly, we came into 2008 with about 80% of the work done on civil rights for gay people. Marriage is a cause for equality sakes, but it's a stupid thing to do unless there are children involved, and maybe even then. Why in God's name would you want to make a single financial and legal unit out of two people, when there are some serious advantages to remaining unlegallymarried?
You really don't get the whole marriage thing, do you? I mean, the whole concept of what marriage is, why society has an interest in it, and what it does to the people involved. For you, it's just another lifestyle choice.


The military thing was a bit different because it affect the lives and opportunities available to young people plus it has to do with the constitution, and we have discussed it to death, so let's leave it.
You kind of missed the whole thing about defending the country. We tend to see that as our priority. Gay rights, not so much.


Um, yeah, right.
You voted for Obama, as you said. He has proposed gutting the military budget, and he has just given up in Iraq, ceding the region to the Islamists. He has put American power behind the Muslim Brotherhood's coup in Egypt, and bombed Libya on behalf of their al Qaeda affilliate. Other Democrats have openly called for our defeat and reveled in our setbacks. Play the snark card all you like, but I stand by my comments.


Enough with your babble, not every liberal is a sympathizer with Hamas, and not every conservative is a noble creature who wouldn't sell out his own country, Rex Tillerman, for the price of a barrel of oil.
If you support politicians who weaken America, undermine our national defense and the values that make it possible, then you are giving our enemies everything that they need. Rome wasn't built in a day, and it didn't decline in a day, either. By the time the barbarians are at the gates, you've already lost.

LOL!!

I figured there would be a required ConOp in powerpoint and a 5-para OpOrd somewhere in the mix.

If we're smart, we'll make the Taliban sit through the PowerPoint, and we'll make sure that it's at least 200 slides with builds on every one. That's how you destroy their will to fight. :D

txradioguy
10-28-2011, 09:10 AM
Originally Posted by Novaheart
Enough with your babble, not every liberal is a sympathizer with Hamas

Show me one that's criticized them when they pick fights with Israel...besides Lieberman.

Remind me which party was calling the new DCI a liar about Iraq and was saying we'd lost prior to the surge?

And I do believe it was a Dem from Pennsylvania that was willing to take the word of a bunch of locals affiliated with al-Qaeda over 7 Marines a few years back.

You're the one who is throwing out senseless babble on this Nova.

Odysseus
10-28-2011, 09:34 AM
Show me one that's criticized them when they pick fights with Israel...besides Lieberman.
Ed Koch, but that's about it.


Remind me which party was calling the new DCI a liar about Iraq and was saying we'd lost prior to the surge?

And I do believe it was a Dem from Pennsylvania that was willing to take the word of a bunch of locals affiliated with al-Qaeda over 7 Marines a few years back.

You're the one who is throwing out senseless babble on this Nova.

And let's not forget that the Pennsylvania Dem was also a former Marine, who was willing to slander his Corps for his party. We're seeing the same thing with the two ex-Marines who signed up with the OWS bunch.

Novaheart
10-28-2011, 10:54 AM
You really don't get the whole marriage thing, do you? I mean, the whole concept of what marriage is, why society has an interest in it, and what it does to the people involved. For you, it's just another lifestyle choice.

I'm well aware of what marriage is, and always has been: property law which defines relationships, ownership, and inheritance. It's nice when it's also romantic, as was my parents' marriage, but the romance and anything else you want to wrap it up in has nothing to do with the basic reason for marriage. It has nothing to do with god or providing a good home for children, that is back and fill. It is property law. It's also politics when dealing with monarchies and primitive tribes.

NJCardFan
10-28-2011, 12:31 PM
Yeah well, we all make compromises. If the Democratic politicians could find their spines when union or environmental thugs show up at Congressional offices, then maybe I could vote for more of them.



See how easy that is? :rolleyes:

Elspeth
10-28-2011, 01:50 PM
So wait....if the terrorists aren't Muslims from "over there", then what terrorists are police being trained to go after?

Us?

Odysseus
10-28-2011, 02:31 PM
I'm well aware of what marriage is, and always has been: property law which defines relationships, ownership, and inheritance. It's nice when it's also romantic, as was my parents' marriage, but the romance and anything else you want to wrap it up in has nothing to do with the basic reason for marriage. It has nothing to do with god or providing a good home for children, that is back and fill. It is property law. It's also politics when dealing with monarchies and primitive tribes.
>sigh<

You talk about marriage as if you're an anthropologist studying an alien species, rather than someone who was raised by two parents. Marriage isn't just about property and religion or children, it's about making men and women function together. Marriage civilizes men and forces women to calculate the value of men, not as objects of desire, but as providers, protectors and nurturers. Marriage forces men to reign in their baser instincts and become something that is bigger than themselves, but not an impersonal institution. It teaches both sexes to compromise and live with each other. It demands that they learn to trust someone who is not like themselves, but shares critical things in common. A society that values marriage teaches young men to be faithful and responsible and teaches young women to seek out such men. Faithful, responsible men are capable of providing for a family and a nation. They value the civic virtues that every successful civilization has lived by, and whose absence inevitably foreshadows their fall. A society that treats men as mere sperm donors and women as objects of pleasure is a society that will consume itself.

So wait....if the terrorists aren't Muslims from "over there", then what terrorists are police being trained to go after?

Us?
No, just some of us. Anyone with an Obama sticker on their Prius is safe.

For now.

Novaheart
10-28-2011, 11:55 PM
You talk about marriage as if you're an anthropologist studying an alien species, rather than someone who was raised by two parents.

You talk about it like you are a poet.

Witmaster
10-29-2011, 04:06 AM
If we're smart, we'll make the Taliban sit through the PowerPoint, and we'll make sure that it's at least 200 slides with builds on every one. That's how you destroy their will to fight. :D
you are SO right.

After about 1-hour of of IPB briefings the only ones we're ready to turn our guns on is ourselves. Maybe it'll work on the Taliban as well.

Odysseus
10-29-2011, 11:33 AM
You talk about it like you are a poet.

No, I talk about it from the inside. I'm married. I know what marriage does, because I saw how it changed me. Marriage makes men into fathers and husbands. It teaches us to live with women and to look to the future. You live entirely in the present.

Bailey
10-29-2011, 11:44 AM
you are SO right.

After about 1-hour of of IPB briefings the only ones we're ready to turn our guns on is ourselves. Maybe it'll work on the Taliban as well.

Why do people hate powerpoint? I dont run into such stuff in my line of work. lol

fettpett
10-29-2011, 06:23 PM
No, I talk about it from the inside. I'm married. I know what marriage does, because I saw how it changed me. Marriage makes men into fathers and husbands. It teaches us to live with women and to look to the future. You live entirely in the present.

QFT

Novaheart
10-29-2011, 09:29 PM
If we're smart, we'll make the Taliban sit through the PowerPoint, and we'll make sure that it's at least 200 slides with builds on every one. That's how you destroy their will to fight. :D

Better yet, make them take Total Quality Management. Did you have to do that in the sticks? Everyone in DOD DC had to participate in that waste of time and money. If you want to get rich, go into corporate training and convince DOD you have something to offer.

Novaheart
10-29-2011, 09:43 PM
No, I talk about it from the inside. I'm married. I know what marriage does, because I saw how it changed me. Marriage makes men into fathers and husbands. It teaches us to live with women and to look to the future. You live entirely in the present.

You don't what my relationships and responsibilities are. Seriously, what you mistake for self esteem in yourself is something else entirely, and the way you express it as a baseline for your attempts to denigrate me only props you up in your own mind. Seriously, how dare you?

AS for your view of marriage, it's utopian and that fact is born out in the statistics and the family courts of America. I have always found it interesting that of my ten or so closest friends, all of our parents were married until death did they part. That doesn't mean that all were happily married or even that all lived together until death did they part. My parents were perhaps the closest to what we would like to think that marriage is about, the social rather than the legal aspect of marriage. But half of my friends had parents who only lived together out of habit or obligation. I happen to think that staying married because you want to is a better model than doing it because you feel it's required or you have nowhere else to go.

Odysseus
10-30-2011, 12:56 AM
You don't what my relationships and responsibilities are. Seriously, what you mistake for self esteem in yourself is something else entirely, and the way you express it as a baseline for your attempts to denigrate me only props you up in your own mind. Seriously, how dare you?

How dare I what? Point out that you live entirely in the present? Of course you do. None of your positions on any issue take the long view of anything. Your entire worldview can be summed up as "Me! Me! Me! Now! Now! Now!" Your positions on marriage, Islam, the military, religion and everything else are based entirely on your narrow interest as a gay man. Nothing else matters to you. I dare call you on it because it's the truth. Deal with it.


AS for your view of marriage, it's utopian and that fact is born out in the statistics and the family courts of America. I have always found it interesting that of my ten or so closest friends, all of our parents were married until death did they part. That doesn't mean that all were happily married or even that all lived together until death did they part. My parents were perhaps the closest to what we would like to think that marriage is about, the social rather than the legal aspect of marriage. But half of my friends had parents who only lived together out of habit or obligation. I happen to think that staying married because you want to is a better model than doing it because you feel it's required or you have nowhere else to go.

You speak of obligation as if it is a nuisance. It isn't. That's part of what you fail to get. Life isn't non-stop passion, it's duty, obligation, integrity and commitment, even when those things aren't easy or as pleasant as running off with the first person that turns your head. My view of marriage isn't Utopian, but based on a far more realistic view of people and history than yours. The stats that you cite don't prove anything about marriage as it was understood by our parents' generation, but simply shows that you and people like you have spent the last half century doing everything possible to destroy the institution, from no-fault divorce to welfare programs that reward illegitimacy, and that your efforts have done tremendous damage. Soon, you will have done even more when you have finally legalized gay marriage, followed by polygamy (and it doesn't matter whether you support that or not, your actions will pave the way for it) and pretty much any other coupling or grouping that someone wants to get the state to sanction. A few decades from now, when marriage rates are even lower, and divorce rates are even higher, your ideological heirs will be trumpeting them as even further "proof" of the failure of marriage, rather than the results of a concerted effort to destroy it.

Witmaster
10-30-2011, 07:20 AM
Why do people hate powerpoint? I dont run into such stuff in my line of work. lol
Powerpoint is the "saltpeter" of intuitive thought and imagination. Especially when combined with the Military Decision Making Process.

It is, however, an ironclad cure for insomnia.

Odysseus
10-30-2011, 10:39 AM
Powerpoint is the "saltpeter" of intuitive thought and imagination. Especially when combined with the Military Decision Making Process.

It is, however, an ironclad cure for insomnia.

PowerPoint can be really useful. There's no better way to present information concisely, but the problem is that most people don't think of it that way. My rule is that if you are presenting a briefing (which is meant to be brief), and you have more than 50 slides, you need to do a Word doc. The exception to this is a ROC Drill, where you're testing the concept of the Word doc, which will be your OPORD. The other thing is that it has bells and whistles which make the presentations more interesting, but the Army frowns on them because they eat bandwidth and increase file size, but without them, you might as well be presenting the Word doc on screen.

Of course, I'm biased, since I actually have a PowerPoint tab that I wear under my pocket flap. :D

Novaheart
10-30-2011, 11:01 AM
How dare I what? Point out that you live entirely in the present? Of course you do. None of your positions on any issue take the long view of anything. Your entire worldview can be summed up as "Me! Me! Me! Now! Now! Now!" Your positions on marriage, Islam, the military, religion and everything else are based entirely on your narrow interest as a gay man. Nothing else matters to you. I dare call you on it because it's the truth. Deal with it. .

How dare you assume that I don't have family, family responsibilities, and that I live entirely in the present (in the bad way, not the Be Here Now way)? I am part of a family.
I have responsibilities, not limited to elder care, child care, building a college fund, keeping three cars on the road, cleaning, painting, fixing stuff and keeping the grass mowed and jungle beaten back on three houses. Did you think that my life was shopping for really cool disco clothes and going dancing? Not since 1985. Seriously, you can be a real jackass.

Witmaster
10-30-2011, 11:11 AM
PowerPoint can be really useful. There's no better way to present information concisely, but the problem is that most people don't think of it that way. My rule is that if you are presenting a briefing (which is meant to be brief), and you have more than 50 slides, you need to do a Word doc. The exception to this is a ROC Drill, where you're testing the concept of the Word doc, which will be your OPORD. The other thing is that it has bells and whistles which make the presentations more interesting, but the Army frowns on them because they eat bandwidth and increase file size, but without them, you might as well be presenting the Word doc on screen.
Of course, I'm biased, since I actually have a PowerPoint tab that I wear under my pocket flap. :D
All of the black finish on band my stainless steel wrist watch is worn to silver from my time as an Operations NCO. Powerpoint casualty of war.

;)

Odysseus
10-30-2011, 11:12 AM
How dare you assume that I don't have family, family responsibilities, and that I live entirely in the present (in the bad way, not the Be Here Now way)? I am part of a family.
I have responsibilities, not limited to elder care, child care, building a college fund, keeping three cars on the road, cleaning, painting, fixing stuff and keeping the grass mowed and jungle beaten back on three houses. Did you think that my life was shopping for really cool disco clothes and going dancing? Not since 1985. Seriously, you can be a real jackass.

With the exception of child care and college funding, everything that you've described is a present issue. And you've never mentioned having children before. Are you a custodial parent? If not, then you are simply assisting someone else in their responsibilities, but that's not the same as assuming them for yourself.

As for the dramatic "how dare you" meme, spare me. When you stop assuming that everyone who isn't gay or in lockstep with your agenda is a bigoted monster and tool of the vast right wing, Catholic, Masonic conspiracy to force you back into the closet, or worse, you can start complaining about our assumptions.

CueSi
10-30-2011, 09:47 PM
No, I talk about it from the inside. I'm married. I know what marriage does, because I saw how it changed me. Marriage makes men into fathers and husbands. It teaches us to live with women and to look to the future. You live entirely in the present.

PFT.

Marriage is only as good as the people in it. Marriage changed you for the better because you WANTED to change, you wanted to be a better man for your wife. I've lost count of how many user women and stupid men who got married and the bitter men and manipulative women that ultimately divorced. I've lost count of 'happily married' men that sat in my chair holding out that $40. So forgive my audible eye rolling. Marriage is not a cynical exercise in property transfer (because there are MANY easier ways one could have done it), nor is it a self-improvement course via romance. People go into marriage for all sorts of reasons. Yours were pure. Congrats. May everyone be as lucky.


All of the black finish on band my stainless steel wrist watch is worn to silver from my time as an Operations NCO. Powerpoint casualty of war.

;)

I can get you a new one... :)

~QC

Hansel
10-31-2011, 07:38 AM
Yeah well, we all make compromises. If the GOP politicians could find their spines when corporate or religious thugs show up at Congressional offices, then maybe I could vote for more of them.

I voted for Obama because I believed that he would lay the groundwork for National Single Payer, and he has. I have also predicted from the very start, that the signature on National Single Payer would be Republican. We'll see.

How would National Single Payer work? Would it be a type of healthcare insurance or would it hire doctors to work for it like the VA does? Could a patient see a private sector doctor, or would there be any private sector doctors?

How would the NSP system be funded?

Odysseus
10-31-2011, 08:09 AM
How would National Single Payer work? Would it be a type of healthcare insurance or would it hire doctors to work for it like the VA does? Could a patient see a private sector doctor, or would there be any private sector doctors?

How would the NSP system be funded?

It would fail, just as it is failing in Britain.

CueSi
10-31-2011, 12:07 PM
It would fail, just as it is failing in Britain.

I gotta agree, single payer seems to be unsustainable in the long run. If countries with populations smaller and more homogeneous than our own can't keep it going...what the hell do you think will happen here?

~QC