Fireworks on Christmas Eve-Is There Anything Dumber ?

Protectionist · Jan 7, 2013

myp said:
Google protectionism and see why that was not the first thing that came to my mind (and probably others): https://www.google.com/search?q=pro...sugexp=chrome,mod=15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Protector would have made me think of one who protects.

I can't believe someone is quibbling with me over my display name (which I been using for 7 years on forums and no one has even brought it up before)
Am I supposed to think there's an important point in here somewhere, because i don't think there is. Protectionist is one of those words 9like a lot of words) that has more than one meaning.

For me, it means protection of the American people from its enemies. If anybody can't sit with that, not my problem.

tecoyah · Jan 8, 2013

Protectionist said:
Protectionist - one who protects.

There is nothing to "Quibble" about...your understanding of the term is incorrect by definition:

pro·tec·tion·ist

noun \-sh(ə-)nist\

Definition of PROTECTIONIST

: an advocate of government economic protection for domestic producers through restrictions on foreign competitors
— pro·tec·tion·ism noun
— protectionist adjective
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/protectionist

But, you are correct in that it is a silly point to argue...

chris7375 · Jan 8, 2013

tecoyah said:
There is nothing to "Quibble" about...your understanding of the term is incorrect by definition:

pro·tec·tion·ist

noun \-sh(ə-)nist\

Definition of PROTECTIONIST

: an advocate of government economic protection for domestic producers through restrictions on foreign competitors
— pro·tec·tion·ism noun
— protectionist adjective
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/protectionist

But, you are correct in that it is a silly point to argue...

I wish you good luck with this and God speed. I been banging my head against the wall for a day now

.

Squishy Skeever · Jan 8, 2013

Protectionist said:
I don't make it a habit of taking advantage of the ignorance of children.

As for my name, what's so "horrible" about protecting what's yours ? Do you lock your doors at night ? If you do you're a protectionist. If you don't you're a fool.

The mainstream "Protectionist" in the American political system is the type of person who would trade Liberty, and freedom, for (albeit, false) protection. In the case of your name, I would happen to assume that you are one to say "We don't need guns, we have the police." Of course, this is my very initial impression, and it may be one which will be proven incorrect - but just in case I am right...

Protectionist · Jan 8, 2013

tecoyah said:
There is nothing to "Quibble" about...your understanding of the term is incorrect by definition:

pro·tec·tion·ist

noun \-sh(ə-)nist\

Definition of PROTECTIONIST

: an advocate of government economic protection for domestic producers through restrictions on foreign competitors
— pro·tec·tion·ism noun
— protectionist adjective
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/protectionist

But, you are correct in that it is a silly point to argue...

That's not the only definition of a protectionist, and if there really wasn't another definition, then I just invented one. As my ex-wife used to say >> There's 2 ways of doing things the (name concealed) way, and the whole rest of the world.

Protectionist · Jan 8, 2013

Squishy Skeever said:
The mainstream "Protectionist" in the American political system is the type of person who would trade Liberty, and freedom, for (albeit, false) protection. In the case of your name, I would happen to assume that you are one to say "We don't need guns, we have the police." Of course, this is my very initial impression, and it may be one which will be proven incorrect - but just in case I am right...

You are totally wrong. I am a strong advocate of gun ownership. I have a concealed weapon license, and I carry a .380 semiautomatic with hollow point bullets, when I'm out walking around.

Most people who are protectionist are the same way. You protect yourself. Simple as that.

tecoyah · Jan 8, 2013

Protectionist said:
That's not the only definition of a protectionist, and if there really wasn't another definition, then I just invented one. As my ex-wife used to say >> There's 2 ways of doing things the (name concealed) way, and the whole rest of the world.

Understood, but this may explain is some way the perceived avoidance others may have to debate you.

By deciding to dismiss data considered valid by everyone else...you do not actually debate.

Protectionist · Jan 8, 2013

tecoyah said:
Understood, but this may explain is some way the perceived avoidance others may have to debate you.

By deciding to dismiss data considered valid by everyone else...you do not actually debate.

I debate, and you and the others hide from it, and pretend yours is the only accepted reality.

Protectionist - one who protects.

Squishy Skeever · Jan 8, 2013

Acually, Protectionist, even though what YOU do is the right way to go about doing things, the American Protectionist Movement, is the same as the Progressive movement, except the Protectionist movement is geared more against things like gun control, censorship, and Politically correct bullshit.

chris7375 · Jan 8, 2013

Protectionist said:
I debate, and you and the others hide from it, and pretend yours is the only accepted reality.

Protectionist - one who protects.

Actually the one I see hiding is you. I have yet to see many sources to back up your argument. The rest of post sources which you just dismiss. I have far from hidden from you. It is not that I don't except what you say but I see no acceptance for what we say.

Protectionist · Jan 8, 2013

Squishy Skeever said:
Acually, Protectionist, even though what YOU do is the right way to go about doing things, the American Protectionist Movement, is the same as the Progressive movement, except the Protectionist movement is geared more against things like gun control, censorship, and Politically correct bullshit.

I don't know what "protectionist movement" you're talking about. I'm just protectionist of the American people against whatever is out there to harm them. Right now, I see those harms as immigration, Islamization, Islamic terrorism (or any kind of terrorism), affirmative action, excessive gun control, corporate greed, etc.

Protectionist · Jan 8, 2013

chris7375 said:
Actually the one I see hiding is you. I have yet to see many sources to back up your argument. The rest of post sources which you just dismiss. I have far from hidden from you. It is not that I don't except what you say but I see no acceptance for what we say.

FALSE! In the Is Islam a Religion ? thread, I gave you excellent sources, and you came right back and posted a post (CONTAINING THOSE SOURCES RIGHT THERE IN YOUR POST-QUOTE) and proceeded to complain that I had not provided sources. Pheeeeeww!! (high-pitched whistle).

If you keep on talking deceitfully like this, you'll have NO CREDIBILITY in this forum. See Post # 125 in >> Is Islam a Religion ?

http://www.politicalfray.com/showthread.php?p=37893#post37893

Squishy Skeever · Jan 8, 2013

Protectionist said:
I don't know what "protectionist movement" you're talking about. I'm just protectionist of the American people against whatever is out there to harm them. Right now, I see those harms as immigration, Islamization, Islamic terrorism (or any kind of terrorism), affirmative action, excessive gun control, corporate greed, etc.

Yes, and I agree with all of that (I'd add Government in there as well). Just... it doesnt matter. I am right!

tecoyah · Jan 9, 2013

Protectionist said:
I don't know what "protectionist movement" you're talking about. I'm just protectionist of the American people against whatever is out there to harm them. Right now, I see those harms as immigration, Islamization, Islamic terrorism (or any kind of terrorism), affirmative action, excessive gun control, corporate greed, etc.

As this is what you see yourself as, I have an interesting question:

Were you asked to protect me (An American) from these perceived issues, or did you self appoint?

I ask because I do not see things in the same way you do, and do not want your type of protection.

myp · Jan 9, 2013

Protectionist said:
I can't believe someone is quibbling with me over my display name (which I been using for 7 years on forums and no one has even brought it up before)
Am I supposed to think there's an important point in here somewhere, because i don't think there is. Protectionist is one of those words 9like a lot of words) that has more than one meaning.

For me, it means protection of the American people from its enemies. If anybody can't sit with that, not my problem.

I don't have a problem with it. I am just saying what most people probably think when they see it...

Gottago · Jan 9, 2013

myp said:
I don't have a problem with it. I am just saying what most people probably think when they see it...

Agreed.

I saw the name, but the position being taken doesn't match the common definition.

Wiki, FWTW: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism

chris7375 · Jan 9, 2013

Protectionist said:
FALSE! In the Is Islam a Religion ? thread, I gave you excellent sources, and you came right back and posted a post (CONTAINING THOSE SOURCES RIGHT THERE IN YOUR POST-QUOTE) and proceeded to complain that I had not provided sources. Pheeeeeww!! (high-pitched whistle).

If you keep on talking deceitfully like this, you'll have NO CREDIBILITY in this forum. See Post # 125 in >> Is Islam a Religion ?

http://www.politicalfray.com/showthread.php?p=37893#post37893

Oh you provided me a list of historical events not sources. The sources you did provide are books that most people won't read (though I will pick a few an read them). Sources I am talking about in a forum setting are news articles with links.

Actually you are the one losing credibility not I. I support my views with sources which I have time and again provided to you with links to news articles which by the contradict what you say. You have yet to provide me a link other then Wiki, and another forum as your sources.

You best bet is to set me on ignore because if I don't agree I will give my two cents along with sources to you. If you engage me then be prepared because I will give back what you dish out. I will do it the proper way.

Oh and just so you know look at the time of my posting about your sources it was yesterday 1:53 PM

http://www.politicalfray.com/showthr...7893#post37893

Your reply with source came after my complaint so nice try. It came yesterday at 3:11. So my complaint about your sources came before you posted your books and so called sources. BTW a forum is not a source. If you plan on saying you did something make sure you did it before the persons complaint not after.

http://politicalfray.com/showpost.php?p=37866&postcount=30

The above link is my complaint. The time is posted on the top left corner. So posting sources after the fact does not in my book count as you being able to say I am wrong in complaining. It also takes credibility away from you not me.

Protectionist · Jan 9, 2013

chris7375 said:
Oh you provided me a list of historical events not sources. The sources you did provide are books that most people won't read (though I will pick a few an read them). Sources I am talking about in a forum setting are news articles with links.

Actually you are the one losing credibility not I. I support my views with sources which I have time and again provided to you with links to news articles which by the contradict what you say. You have yet to provide me a link other then Wiki, and another forum as your sources.

You best bet is to set me on ignore because if I don't agree I will give my two cents along with sources to you. If you engage me then be prepared because I will give back what you dish out. I will do it the proper way.

Oh and just so you know look at the time of my posting about your sources it was yesterday 1:53 PM

http://www.politicalfray.com/showthr...7893#post37893

Your reply with source came after my complaint so nice try. It came yesterday at 3:11. So my complaint about your sources came before you posted your books and so called sources. BTW a forum is not a source. If you plan on saying you did something make sure you did it before the persons complaint not after.

http://politicalfray.com/showpost.php?p=37866&postcount=30

The above link is my complaint. The time is posted on the top left corner. So posting sources after the fact does not in my book count as you being able to say I am wrong in complaining. It also takes credibility away from you not me.

You're being incredibly ridiculous here. OK, BULLHEAD! I'll re-print the SOURCES YOU WERE GIVEN (which you are now lying that you didn't get)
And this will be followed by AN APOLOGY FROM YOU for saying >> "You have yet to provide me a link other then Wiki, and another forum as your sources."

As I said in Post # 113, the declaration of war upon America from the Muslim Brotherhood is their Explanatory Memorandum. I posted it

the SOURCE shown in green)

"The process of settlement [of Islam in the United States] is a "Civilization-Jihadist" process with all that the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood in North America] must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" their miserable house by their hands, and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated, and Allah's religion is made victorious over all religions."

Mohamed Akram, "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America" May 22, 1991, Government Exhibit 003-0085, United States vs. Holy Land Foundation, et al

Furthermore, I posted this: (the SOURCE shown in blue)

"The bitter situation that the nation has reached is a result of its divergence from Allah's course and his righteous law for all places and times. That [situation] came about as a result of its children's love for the world, their loathing of death, and their abandonment of jihad." (al Qaeda training manual, http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/laden.htm.

Still furthermore, I posted this (the Source shown in green

"The Umma and its youth, women, elderly, must offer themselves, their expertise, and all sort of financial support enough to raise jihad in the battlefields of jihad. Jihad today is a duty of every Muslim." (famous state of Jihad speech on Al-Jazeera)

And no, my sources were posted in the Is Islam a Religion Thread, almost 2 days ago, in Post # 113, at 1:22 AM. More than 12 hours LATER, in Post # 124, at 1:29 PM, you started whining about sources when you said THIS >>> "What Proof your word you gave me little information if any to go one. Nothing I can look up where are your sources." (and I had already given the sources - shown here in this post - the previous day) I posted my sources in post # 113 well BEFORE your little whines about sources.

Now it's time for YOUR APOLOGY. Let's see if you've got the backbone for it.

chris7375 · Jan 9, 2013

Protectionist said:
You're being incredibly ridiculous here. OK, BULLHEAD! I'll re-print the SOURCES YOU WERE GIVEN (which you are now lying that you didn't get)
And this will be followed by AN APOLOGY FROM YOU for saying >> "You have yet to provide me a link other then Wiki, and another forum as your sources."

As I said in Post # 113, the declaration of war upon America from the Muslim Brotherhood is their Explanatory Memorandum. I posted it the SOURCE shown in green)

"The process of settlement [of Islam in the United States] is a "Civilization-Jihadist" process with all that the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood in North America] must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" their miserable house by their hands, and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated, and Allah's religion is made victorious over all religions."

Mohamed Akram, "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America" May 22, 1991, Government Exhibit 003-0085, United States vs. Holy Land Foundation, et al

Furthermore, I posted this: (the SOURCE shown in blue)

"The bitter situation that the nation has reached is a result of its divergence from Allah's course and his righteous law for all places and times. That [situation] came about as a result of its children's love for the world, their loathing of death, and their abandonment of jihad." (al Qaeda training manual, http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/laden.htm.

Still furthermore, I posted this (the Source shown in green

"The Umma and its youth, women, elderly, must offer themselves, their expertise, and all sort of financial support enough to raise jihad in the battlefields of jihad. Jihad today is a duty of every Muslim." (famous state of Jihad speech on Al-Jazeera)

And no, my sources were posted in the Is Islam a Religion Thread, almost 2 days ago, in Post # 113, at 1:22 AM. More than 12 hours LATER, in Post # 124, at 1:29 PM, you started whining about sources when you said THIS >>> "What Proof your word you gave me little information if any to go one. Nothing I can look up where are your sources." (and I had already given the sources - shown here in this post - the previous day) I posted my sources in post # 113 well BEFORE your little whines about sources.

Now it's time for YOUR APOLOGY. Let's see if you've got the backbone for it.

Maybe you are new to this I don't know I doubt it. For the most part a source on a forum is a link that one can go back and read.

I will apologize for the Al Qaeda manual I did miss that one. Though you have yet to prove to me how all Muslims follow that one document. For future reference though my experience is that most people want to be able to read a source straight away. Other on the forum can weigh in on this but I like to be able to read the information you are claiming your view on right away rather then having to purchase books and read them.

I speak for myself other can speak for themselves.

Second you really need to learn how to act with people. You come off like some kind of self righteous prick (if this gets me in trouble so be it). You have next to no manners with interactions with others.

It seems to me you fail to understand not everyone shares your views. God forbid someone have a different opinion. If you don't like their opinion you runaway from the discussion why I don't know but hey that is how I see it.

This statement fits you to a T

Their insecurity shows itself in pride, a fierce, defensive assertion of their own righteousness, and defensive criticism of others. They come naturally to hate other cultural styles and other races in order to bolster their own security and discharge their suppressed anger.
Richard Lovelace The Dynamics of Spiritual Life

You don't want debate me ignore me but if you post something I disagree with I will let you know because that is who I am.

clax · Jan 9, 2013

chris7375 said:
Maybe you are new to this I don't know I doubt it. For the most part a source on a forum is a link that one can go back and read.

I will apologize for the Al Qaeda manual I did miss that one. For future reference though my experience is that most people want to be able to read a source straight away. Other on the forum can weigh in on this but I like to be able to read the information you are claiming your view on right away rather then having to purchase books and read them.

I speak for myself other can speak for themselves.

Second you really need to learn how to act with people. You come off like some kind of self righteous prick (if this gets me in trouble so be it). You have next to no manners with interactions with others.

It seems to me you fail to understand not everyone shares your views. God forbid someone have a different opinion. If you don't like their opinion you runaway from the discussion why I don't know but hey that is how I see it.

This statement fits you to a T

You don't want debate me ignore me but if you post something I disagree with I will let you know because that is who I am.

I thought this was about fire works, not anti Islam. Some people have a one track mind.

No Islamic boogie men here.

Fireworks on Christmas Eve-Is There Anything Dumber ?

Similar threads