“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/01/khizr ... haria-law/
A short biography of Khan in the journal article says that he is the author of “In Defense of OPEC” and “Legal Index of the Quran.” It also lists that he is the co-founder of Journal of Contemporary Issues in Muslim Law.
Yup, not a moderate.
A rational skeptic should be able to discuss and debate anything, no matter how much they may personally disagree with that point of view. Discussing a subject is not agreeing with it, but understanding it.
Trump's not racist. And I'm a bit of an expert on that subject.....
That Mexican American judge, who happens to advocate for allowing illegals..... Yeah I can see why trump doesn't want him.
Illegal aliens? We have actual laws against it that aren't enforced.
Muslims? Gotta be careful about who you let in and keep terrorists and sharia advocates out.
A rational skeptic should be able to discuss and debate anything, no matter how much they may personally disagree with that point of view. Discussing a subject is not agreeing with it, but understanding it.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/01/khizr ... haria-law/
A short biography of Khan in the journal article says that he is the author of “In Defense of OPEC” and “Legal Index of the Quran.” It also lists that he is the co-founder of Journal of Contemporary Issues in Muslim Law.
Yup, not a moderate.
I think he meant from a reputable source.
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
Donald Trump gave America a peek inside his mind, when near the end of a campaign event in Florida, the Republican nominee referred to himself as "Mr. President."
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here. .
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
"The King craves that which he cannot possess." -- Anne Boleyn.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here. .
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
Are they illegal? Where? Many countries have them.
Hillary Clinton supports the development of tactical, battlefield nuclear weapons. If it's improper and "stupid" ask why such weapons cannot be used, then what level of stupidity is it to support development of weapons that cannot be used?
Isn't the answer to the question: they can, in fact, be used, in some circumstances? There are circumstances in US policy, British policy, French policy, Indian policy, Russian policy, etc., in which the use of nuclear weapons is called for.
This is one of those media circus events where we have double-hearsay -- "someone told me that Trump asked him such-and-such" and we're arguing about what Trump supposedly said, not to the person reporting it, but to another person. What was the context? Why were the questions asked? And, we have a situation where the worst is read into the question, and a motive is read into the question. He's asking why we can't use them, because the first thing he wants to do is use them. Well, why don't we take a step back? Doesn't every president need to know why they cannot (or can) be used in given circumstances? Or should/should not be used?
Yes, but you've got your lawyer hat on. A good lawyer can defend damn near anything.
The obvious answer is that we can't use them because MAD. There's nothing wrong with forgetting that.
About me: When ever I behave as a man I am called sexist, It seems being a male is now illegal and nobody sent me the memo. Good job as I would have told them to fuck off.
I suppose it's "arguably true" that Trump saw a video of cash being offloaded from a plane in Iran. Even his own campaign says that he didn't, but no doubt Forty Two can explain how that argument would go. "Trump Repeats Apparent False Claim of Iran Cash Transfer Video"
About me: When ever I behave as a man I am called sexist, It seems being a male is now illegal and nobody sent me the memo. Good job as I would have told them to fuck off.
L'Emmerdeur wrote:I suppose it's "arguably true" that Trump saw a video of cash being offloaded from a plane in Iran. Even his own campaign says that he didn't, but no doubt Forty Two can explain how that argument would go. "Trump Repeats Apparent False Claim of Iran Cash Transfer Video"
As if forty two doesn't know about how the money was frozen during the Iranian crisis. I have seen nothing from you to suggest you are more intelligent than forty two, Quite the opposite in fact.
We should be MOST skeptical of ideas we like because we are sufficiently skeptical of ideas that we don't like. Penn Jillette.
