cnredd said:
To 26 X World Champs..(I didn't feel like going back and forth with the quotes...not necessary here).
Your response to my question...using LdMidRighter's comment...is weak and expected of you...read it again...I'd like to see her get arrested along with all of the other protesters on harassment charges...the part that you "bolded"...
Backpeddling a bit don't you think? Let me remind you what YOU wrote:
Originally Posted by cnredd
Name one time someone on this forum said she should be arrested or she is NOT ALLOWED to speak her mind....One....
No one has said that....NO ONE!...N-O O-N-E...nada...zip...zero....zilch....
You made a statement that was untrue and I found one simple example to prove your statement was false, get over it. Pride is one of the seven deadly sins because it interferes with someones ability to be honest with themselves so they backpedal and try to twist the truth to serve their prideful purposes, you know?
cnredd said:
Does the part about "harassment" fly over your dome?...He doesn't mention anything about the first amendment or being "not allowed to speak her mind".
He is equating this to a jilted lover who stalks her(his?) object...He sounds like a "restraining order" should be in place....
Again, it sounds to me like Lance Armstrong in reverese. :mrgreen:
cnredd said:
Although I don't agree with this, I do see how his "angle" is conceivable...You can't be that immature to believe that Cindy Al-Sheehani's motive does not include harassing the President. That is the major reason she gets media coverage...If she did it quietly, and just for personal reasons, there wouldn't be a story...Right?
I do see you calling her a slur (Cindy Al-Sheehani's) to suggest that she's a Muslim terrorist? Modus operandi for you? You are free to have your opinion of what you believe her motive is. Since you've never lost a son to war it is quite presumptious for anyone to assume her or anyone's feelings. If it makes you feel better about your talking points presume things feel free, this is America, you can say anything you like.
cnredd said:
I will repost this...your quote...
Originally Posted by 26 X World Champs
I agree! It seems to me that some people who oppose her have trouble understanding that because her son was killed in a war that America is against she should not be allowed to speak her mind, and to speak it as often as she wants to so long as it is within the legal limits of the law.
Please show me where it says that people in this community said that she does not have the freedom to speak her mind? I realize that you enjoy ball busting me and you're trying to be confrontational but really, let's not waste each other's time on further "he said, she said" stuff.
cnredd said:
My argument still stands...and on solid ground....No one has said she should not have the freedom to speak her mind...
No one is disagreeing with you?
cnredd said:
As long as they don't trample on other's property, and they do it in an orderly fashion as per the local laws, she could hang out there 'til she's blue in the face...that is not what dissenting views oppose her for...
Who would disagree with such an obvious statement? That was my original point re "breaking the law." Sometimes towns will arrest groups of people for "illegal assembly" or demand that the group needs a permit to gather and protest, that is what I was referring to, not that Rove's Rangers were going to bust her for being there or for speaking her mind. If she attempted to passively resist etc. or something like that is again, what I meant.
cnredd said:
As for me twisting the truth, I have two points...
1)You believe LdMidRighter's comment could be a quality source to prove my assertation that no one has said she should be forced to stop her protest...I disagree...That is debatable.
2)Your pointing out one person does not refute my claim that you couldn't find...as your words say..."some people who oppose her have trouble understanding that because her son was killed in a war that America is against she should not be allowed to speak her mind, and to speak it as often as she wants to so long as it is within the legal limits of the law."
This is what you wrote, why are you denying it, it's in the public record:
Originally Posted by cnredd
Name one time someone on this forum said she should be arrested or she is NOT ALLOWED to speak her mind....One....
No one has said that....NO ONE!...N-O O-N-E...nada...zip...zero....zilch....
Last time, this is so redundant....READ MY POST...Did I say people in Debate Politics or did I say "some people"?
Originally Posted by cnredd
Name one time someone on this forum said she should be arrested or she is NOT ALLOWED to speak her mind....One....
No one has said that....NO ONE!...N-O O-N-E...nada...zip...zero....zilch....
Seems pretty black and white to me, you know?
cnredd said:
That is mostly my fault...I shouldn't have asked you to find "one" source...I should have asked to find "some"...as your post suggests...I unintentionaly let you off the hook.
Yes, you are correct, it is your fault, you finally got it right.