-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Does Tee Stand For Terrorist?
- Thread starter CCGirl
- Start date
Sycophant
My milkshake brings all the boys to the yard
- Mar 11, 2004
- 4,022
- 272
- 45
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
I'd like to know how they could think it might be a threat..
Maybe it could say "strike here!" or something.
But really, it's a t-shirt, in a foreign language. There are hundreds of them. In Asian languages especially. They are quite fashionable (so I am led to believe, it's not like I know).
Arabic scripts look cool. It's just as likely that it says nothing at all (like those Chinese tattoos that people get).
Maybe it could say "strike here!" or something.
But really, it's a t-shirt, in a foreign language. There are hundreds of them. In Asian languages especially. They are quite fashionable (so I am led to believe, it's not like I know).
Arabic scripts look cool. It's just as likely that it says nothing at all (like those Chinese tattoos that people get).
Upvote
0
Sycophant
My milkshake brings all the boys to the yard
- Mar 11, 2004
- 4,022
- 272
- 45
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
People do wear shirts like that. And they would probably get a negative response from many people. But I doubt they'd be questioned by the Coast Guard.
Also that is quite different to this shirt - the shirt in question doesn't say "death to America" or anything like that. It is not anti-American, or supporting 'terrorists'. It is expressing solidarity and unity.
You can see (and buy) the shirt here
Upvote
0
It is important to note that the t-shirt in question says "We will not be silent" in Arabic and English!
Upvote
0
I
Imalittleteapot
Guest
do you have an actual news source for this? Or just the propaganda site?Does Tee Stand For Terrorist? NYC Student Stopped on Staten Island Ferry For Wearing T-Shirt Saying We Will Not Be Silent in Arabic
What???!!?
Listen/Watch
Upvote
0
I
Imalittleteapot
Guest
Why am I betting that there is more to this than just a T-shirt. Why am I betting that there was suspicious behavior involved as well?
Upvote
0
Or worse: what if it had a Cross on it!?
Exactly. The airlines should not allow anyone on the plane with any Christian symbolism. Shirts must be turned inside out, necklaces must be hidden and wwjd braclets taken off.
Also, don't wear a cross when using the ferry or you will be surrounded and questioned by the US Coast guard.
Upvote
0
I
Imalittleteapot
Guest
Right! Cause we all know that the one thing that most every terrorist attack in the last 20 years has had in common is that they were perpetuated by Christians.
Upvote
0
I
Imalittleteapot
Guest
Oh I know the government can and does violate our rights. Thing of it is, I don't trust for a second the sources of this story. I trust the government more than I trust the website linked to in the opening post.
Upvote
0
I've never known Democracy Now to be anything but reputable, but that's neither here nor there. The source of the story is the person who was wearing the shirt, Stephanie Schwartz. Democracy Now simply interviewed her. If you want to claim that Ms. Schwartz is lying, that's one thing, but that would have nothing to do with Democracy Now. If Ms. Schwartz is lying, I would expect the Coast Guard to say so, but the CG declined to respond to the accusations.
Upvote
0
I
Imalittleteapot
Guest
To even acknowledge the accusations would to admit they had a shred of validity. Democracy Now may be reliable in your eyes, but then I'll wager you think President Clinton was a Good president that universal healthcare would be a benefit, and that the UN is an effective institution. Am I wrong?
Upvote
0
Baloney. Governmental agencies routinely deny accusations.
Again, Democracy Now conducted an interview. Please explain how this interview is unreliable, and how that would relate to Democracy Now's credibility?
Oh brother.
There is obviously only one of us whose opinion is being guided by partisanship, and I'll wager that most who are reading our discussion can quickly name who that is.
Upvote
0
What on earth does George Soros have to do with anything? We're discussing an event as described by Stephanie Schwartz. Ms. Schwartz credibility is independent of Democracy Now, and has absolutely nothing to do with George Soros.
Do you form opinions based on facts or partisanship? When Democracy Now reported that George Bush had won the 2004 election, would you have denied that fact based on the organization that reported it?
Democracy Now reports news and conducts interviews. I challange you to provide one shred of evidence that discredits either.
By your rhetoric, which lacks any semblence of argumentation, together with your avatar and sig line, I can see that your stance is little more than "liberals suck." I welcome you to the forum, but I don't think you'll get very far with that approach.
Upvote
0
Ah, of course your right. The one thing that most every terrorist attack in the last 20 years has had in common is that they were all perpetuated by people of brown skin. In that case all people of brown skin should not be allowed on planes without covering themselves and should have no problem being surrounded and questioned by authoities because of said brown skin.
Also, if a Christian is ever responsible for a terrorist attack, would you then agree to my modest proposal of not allowing any Christian symbolism on planes and to be subject to questioning in general?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
