other one Posted January 13, 2015 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 598 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,170 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,896 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted January 13, 2015 Do you think the French really care of Obama was there or not??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoes_untied Posted January 13, 2015 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 292 Content Per Day: 0.08 Reputation: 37 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/17/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted January 13, 2015 This whole issue is mostly a product of the information age. A rally is pulled together on short notice and great political photo ops arise from it. Yeah, it was short notice and 50 other world leaders were able to pull it together and move their security detail and make the event. It was just as short notice for them, as well. So the short notice thing is just an excuse. Suddenly Obama isn't appearing in photo's with a terrorist head of state and his haters say it's a disgrace, never mind that the same people would happily use such images in a different context to show that he is in fact in favor of terrorism. Yeah, right... We would use the images of President Obama at a rally against Islamic terrorism as proof that he is in favor of terrorism??? Let me know when you have an intelligent argument to make.... These are also critics who had no idea in the first place that the rally was happening yet now it is an epic missed opportunity. France admits it was pulled together on short notice, there are no heads of states from any of the Americas at the rally. The U.S. is leading the coalition of airstrikes against ISIS, something the Obama administration initiated. France isn't a part of this coalition at all. France says they are not at all offended. The Obama administration admits they should have had a high ranking official. More empty arguments. It is an epic missed opportunity. The world leaders and their governments knew it was happening and this president knew it was happening. The problem is that it was a show of solidarity against Islamic terrorism and our president can't bring himself to admit that Islamic terrorism exists. For him to show up at the rally would be a tacit admission that Islamic terrorism is real. This has nothing to do with whether or not France is bombing ISIS and our president only started bombing ISIS after intense public outrage at the beheading of Americans. Had it not been for the intense heat of American outrage there would have been no bombing of ISIS. Oh and by the way, the bombings have not been all that successful. Any ground we gain is lost because we don't have boots on the ground to hold our gains. But what do you expect from a bunch of amateurs in the White House??? Conclusion: Obama is in favor of terrorism and is a Muslim. And here comes the strawman... Since it gets difficult to read embedding responses two or three responses in, I will just briefly respond to some of your comments below which is all I have time for. Regarding how a photo of him at an anti-terrorism rally would get used against him. That is easy to answer and I could go on and on but there is a segment of the population that processes everything through a confirmation bias filter where they indiscriminately take in any information that feeds their existing bias's and swat away anything that might challenge their ideas. Some takes a still frame of Obama walking onto a stage that looks like he is standing there and claims he failed to salute the flag: boom - believed, a hack writes an article implying that Obama was part of student cheering at Columbia University when Reagan was shot when Obama was not yet even a student at Columbia when Reagan was shot: Boom - believed, a marine charges into a school that is indoctrinating kids into Islam even the fact show that it was clearly part of a broader study that included the study of Christianity: boom - believed, and I could go on and on. Sites like tpnn.com make their living feeding this group what they want to here. No it is not hard at all to see the France situation spun a half dozen different ways regardless of whether he went or not because this gullible group will believe virtually anything anti-Obama. Regarding the comment about bringing on the straw man arguments. I was referring to claims made by posters in this thread. If you feel those are straw man claims, feel free to take that up with them since you didn't when they were originally posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 This whole issue is mostly a product of the information age. A rally is pulled together on short notice and great political photo ops arise from it. Yeah, it was short notice and 50 other world leaders were able to pull it together and move their security detail and make the event. It was just as short notice for them, as well. So the short notice thing is just an excuse. Suddenly Obama isn't appearing in photo's with a terrorist head of state and his haters say it's a disgrace, never mind that the same people would happily use such images in a different context to show that he is in fact in favor of terrorism. Yeah, right... We would use the images of President Obama at a rally against Islamic terrorism as proof that he is in favor of terrorism??? Let me know when you have an intelligent argument to make.... These are also critics who had no idea in the first place that the rally was happening yet now it is an epic missed opportunity. France admits it was pulled together on short notice, there are no heads of states from any of the Americas at the rally. The U.S. is leading the coalition of airstrikes against ISIS, something the Obama administration initiated. France isn't a part of this coalition at all. France says they are not at all offended. The Obama administration admits they should have had a high ranking official. More empty arguments. It is an epic missed opportunity. The world leaders and their governments knew it was happening and this president knew it was happening. The problem is that it was a show of solidarity against Islamic terrorism and our president can't bring himself to admit that Islamic terrorism exists. For him to show up at the rally would be a tacit admission that Islamic terrorism is real. This has nothing to do with whether or not France is bombing ISIS and our president only started bombing ISIS after intense public outrage at the beheading of Americans. Had it not been for the intense heat of American outrage there would have been no bombing of ISIS. Oh and by the way, the bombings have not been all that successful. Any ground we gain is lost because we don't have boots on the ground to hold our gains. But what do you expect from a bunch of amateurs in the White House??? Conclusion: Obama is in favor of terrorism and is a Muslim. And here comes the strawman... Since it gets difficult to read embedding responses two or three responses in, I will just briefly respond to some of your comments below which is all I have time for. Regarding how a photo of him at an anti-terrorism rally would get used against him. That is easy to answer and I could go on and on but there is a segment of the population that processes everything through a confirmation bias filter where they indiscriminately take in any information that feeds their existing bias's and swat away anything that might challenge their ideas. Some takes a still frame of Obama walking onto a stage that looks like he is standing there and claims he failed to salute the flag: boom - believed, a hack writes an article implying that Obama was part of student cheering at Columbia University when Reagan was shot when Obama was not yet even a student at Columbia when Reagan was shot: Boom - believed, a marine charges into a school that is indoctrinating kids into Islam even the fact show that it was clearly part of a broader study that included the study of Christianity: boom - believed, and I could go on and on. Sites like tpnn.com make their living feeding this group what they want to here. No it is not hard at all to see the France situation spun a half dozen different ways regardless of whether he went or not because this gullible group will believe virtually anything anti-Obama. None of that makes any case for why a picture of Obama in France in that rally wold be spun against him. That is just pure hokum. But since you couldn't refute the substance of what I said, I can see why you would raise such a non-issue. Regarding the comment about bringing on the straw man arguments. I was referring to claims made by posters in this thread. If you feel those are straw man claims, feel free to take that up with them since you didn't when they were originally posted. It was made by one poster, I think and was not the genuine consensus of the thread. You were not responding to any particular poster and that's why your comment was a strawman. It attributes a claim to the rest of us that we never articulated or intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoes_untied Posted January 15, 2015 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 292 Content Per Day: 0.08 Reputation: 37 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/17/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted January 15, 2015 This whole issue is mostly a product of the information age. A rally is pulled together on short notice and great political photo ops arise from it. Yeah, it was short notice and 50 other world leaders were able to pull it together and move their security detail and make the event. It was just as short notice for them, as well. So the short notice thing is just an excuse. Suddenly Obama isn't appearing in photo's with a terrorist head of state and his haters say it's a disgrace, never mind that the same people would happily use such images in a different context to show that he is in fact in favor of terrorism. Yeah, right... We would use the images of President Obama at a rally against Islamic terrorism as proof that he is in favor of terrorism??? Let me know when you have an intelligent argument to make.... These are also critics who had no idea in the first place that the rally was happening yet now it is an epic missed opportunity. France admits it was pulled together on short notice, there are no heads of states from any of the Americas at the rally. The U.S. is leading the coalition of airstrikes against ISIS, something the Obama administration initiated. France isn't a part of this coalition at all. France says they are not at all offended. The Obama administration admits they should have had a high ranking official. More empty arguments. It is an epic missed opportunity. The world leaders and their governments knew it was happening and this president knew it was happening. The problem is that it was a show of solidarity against Islamic terrorism and our president can't bring himself to admit that Islamic terrorism exists. For him to show up at the rally would be a tacit admission that Islamic terrorism is real. This has nothing to do with whether or not France is bombing ISIS and our president only started bombing ISIS after intense public outrage at the beheading of Americans. Had it not been for the intense heat of American outrage there would have been no bombing of ISIS. Oh and by the way, the bombings have not been all that successful. Any ground we gain is lost because we don't have boots on the ground to hold our gains. But what do you expect from a bunch of amateurs in the White House??? Conclusion: Obama is in favor of terrorism and is a Muslim. And here comes the strawman... Since it gets difficult to read embedding responses two or three responses in, I will just briefly respond to some of your comments below which is all I have time for. Regarding how a photo of him at an anti-terrorism rally would get used against him. That is easy to answer and I could go on and on but there is a segment of the population that processes everything through a confirmation bias filter where they indiscriminately take in any information that feeds their existing bias's and swat away anything that might challenge their ideas. Some takes a still frame of Obama walking onto a stage that looks like he is standing there and claims he failed to salute the flag: boom - believed, a hack writes an article implying that Obama was part of student cheering at Columbia University when Reagan was shot when Obama was not yet even a student at Columbia when Reagan was shot: Boom - believed, a marine charges into a school that is indoctrinating kids into Islam even the fact show that it was clearly part of a broader study that included the study of Christianity: boom - believed, and I could go on and on. Sites like tpnn.com make their living feeding this group what they want to here. No it is not hard at all to see the France situation spun a half dozen different ways regardless of whether he went or not because this gullible group will believe virtually anything anti-Obama. None of that makes any case for why a picture of Obama in France in that rally wold be spun against him. That is just pure hokum. But since you couldn't refute the substance of what I said, I can see why you would raise such a non-issue. Regarding the comment about bringing on the straw man arguments. I was referring to claims made by posters in this thread. If you feel those are straw man claims, feel free to take that up with them since you didn't when they were originally posted. It was made by one poster, I think and was not the genuine consensus of the thread. You were not responding to any particular poster and that's why your comment was a strawman. It attributes a claim to the rest of us that we never articulated or intended. Put simply, the image in question could easily be used out of context in the future and the same group that believe anything and get new legs with a whole new spin. At one time I would have said they could wait a year and reuse but this epic moment is already completely forgotten by the media and far from the minds of the average person that tpnn and the like probably only needs to wait a month or two before it uses it for a whole new spin. My last post on this issue since it is already so forgotten that people will be annoyed to see it brought up again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustinM Posted January 15, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 144 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,512 Content Per Day: 0.68 Reputation: 625 Days Won: 10 Joined: 04/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/07/1979 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I don't believe anyone has forgotten what happened in Paris or will forget it any time soon, but one thing I think we can all agree on, this President will not publicly admit that islamic terrorism is the only real threat the world faces today. We have to ask ourselves why? Why won't the President confront this issue? Why won't he take a stand against islamic supremacism? The President just released 5 more GITMO prisoners last night. All 5 of them from Yemen, the country where al qaeda is claiming responsibility for the attack on Paris. This may sound crazy, but what is the significance of 5, which is what the President always seems to repeat when it comes to GITMO? How about the 5 pillars of islam? I don't want to go into conspiracy territory in this forum, but we all know the President has been accused of being a secret muslim, because of actions like this. The coincidences are just too common to be accidental. He may not be islamic, but he sure has an affinity for islam and he constantly antagonizes his political enemies with his islamic gestures. Obviously there are bad leaders out there, like Putin, Kim Jong Un, Hu Jintao, etc., but they at least have a sense of self preservation, something the islamic fanatics do not have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts