MESSAGE
| DATE | 2017-01-29 |
| FROM | Rick Moen
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [Hangout-NYLXS] In other news, making America safe again
|
Quoting Ruben Safir (ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com):
> she is, of course. cair is muslim brotherhood
To repeat, provided CAIR are concerned with First Amendment free
speech activities, I couldn't possibly care less whom they associate
with or how. You know, First Amendment? You've heard of it?
I am still awaiting -- with a complete and total lack of expectation --
your apology for attributing to me a dumb political view that I never
articulated and don't hold. I refer to this one, the latest in a long
series of occasions when any decent person would have apologised:
> I wouldn't base a decision on this but just to refute the obvious lack
> of threat you think there is
I made no such claim.
You are attributing to me a view I do not hold, and neither expressed
nor implied.
I have two hypotheses for why you consistently fail to apologise
after getting caught saying personally insulting, carelessly erroneous
things, and I'm tending to think they both apply: 1. You have no
manners whatsoever. 2. You just aren't able to think clearly.
But enough about your absence of manners. There's a more serious thing,
which is that you appear to be opposed to First Amendment freedom of
religion, which, considering you are a religious member of the Jewish
faith, the most persecuted religious minority still surviving on the
face of the planet, means you are -=totally=- unconscious of irony, in
_addition_ to those aforementioned problems of being incurably rude and
unable to think properly.
I refer to
Also - just to be clear, racist or NOT I don't want the US to be a
reflection of all nations in the world. I don't want it to be 1/4
Chinese for example. I certainly don't want it to be proportionally
Muslim.
and
He left out SA, Dubayi, Kuwait, and most importantly Pakastan and
Banglagesh.
By which you imply that you have something against Muslims just on
account of their religion, right? Not any unlawful deeds, just what
religious beliefs they profess?
Now, your hilariously deluded statement about how I personally set
national immigration policy notwithstanding, I have exactly zero
influence over USA immigration practices, but my understanding is that,
since the 1960s, the USA has had a per-country quota of immigrants
permitted per year, _and_ there has been a particular emphasis on
getting rid of previous unconstitutional bias against particular
religions, such as, notably, the tragic bias against Jews immediately
before and during WWII, without which many more of the Ashkenazim in
Europe would have been spared their fate.
But you appear to think this 1960s reform was in error and must be
overturned, because you would like to _institute_ an unconstitutional
bias against Muslims, right? I don't want to jump to that conclusion
without asking, so I'm asking: Do I correctly summarize your position?
If that is your position, then you are most certainly permitted to hold
it, because that is part of what 1st Amendment freedom of speech is all
about: the right to peaceably express opposition to this nation's core
principles. However, if you do hold that anti-Constitutional position
and ever _act_ on it, then please be advised that you pretty much
instantly become the enemy of my country. Because, no, we don't do
that, and my country is prepared to fight to make sure it doesn't
happen.
And, by the way, that tap on your shoulder is the Irony Fairy.
Don't try to overturn my country, Ruben. We fight back.
_______________________________________________
hangout mailing list
hangout-at-nylxs.com
http://www.nylxs.com/
|
|
