[Catsmine]

All I've said, and I STILL say it, is that our Constitution can withstand such assaults. My question for you, is why you think it won't.

excon

You're right on this point, Ex. Capitalism will win this round. If the cab drivers only take passengers with no booze or pork rinds and only get their same share of other fares, they are driving their income down. Cabbies don't usually make enough for this political statement to last very long unless they get subsidized by their mosque. If they do, Capitalism still wins as the subsidy won't then pay for a bomb or a passport to Yemen.

[smoothy]

The left is currently argueing and pretending Muslims have NEVER tried to do it here, and that it wouldn't be allowed (force Sharia onto Americans)... when in fact it is. And that's not considering situations they have gotten it in under the pretext of binding arbitration...

How would YOU like to be bound to dispute resolution via arbitration (store, or any other source at all) that turns out to be Sharia in disguise.

Need an analogy of how they are approaching this...

And they are piecemeal... just like the gungrabbers on the left have been doing with gun control laws... get the foot in the door and keep ratcheting it up a little at a time to not raise too much attention to what they are actually trying to do.


Just like cooking a frog in an open pot... throw the frog in a pot of hot water and it jumps out immediately... but put it a pot of cool water and slowly turn up the heat and you have boiled frog because by the time it knew what was going on it was too late.

And it really isn't any different with taxes... or entitlement programs, Little bit now... a little more later, next thing you have over 38% of the population contributing nothing and the rest paying for their handouts.


And what better way than take impressionable kids to feed them propaganda how nice and friendly Islam is... without actually telling them the truth about it.

Getting that foot further in the door...

[Wondergirl]

And what better way than take impressionable kids to feed them propaganda how nice and friendly Islam is.....without actually telling them the truth about it.

It was the school that imposed themselves on the Muslims, not the other way around.

[speechlesstx]

It was the school that imposed themselves on the Muslims, not the other way around.

Schools typically don't impose themselves on field trips. The mosque hosted the event, it was no imposition.

[smoothy]

It was the school that imposed themselves on the Muslims, not the other way around.

Really... then whose bright idea was it to drag the kids to a Mosque, against Federal law if it wasn't a Muslim that sold the IDEA to someone in the School. Teachers don't have that authority... much less the 6th grade students. Someone approved that trip in the schools administration.

That someone should be fired and forced to repay the total costs of said trip, and should be charged with missappropriation of school funds and assets.

Any proof of which side initiated it? The answer of which actually is irrelevant based on the fact School resources were spent on school hours (all from Taxpayers pockets) to drag kids to a Mosque when equivalent homage isn't allowed to be paid to other major religions.

[Wondergirl]

Really... then whose bright idea was it to drag the kids to a Mosque,

Every year our school set aside one week of pure hands-on, practical learning and field trips, but no classes. We took the kids horseback riding, to Maywood Park (horse racing track and heard about the betting process), went to Cosley Park (petting zoo with amazing kinds of animals), had a class on manners and poise, did all kinds of crafts and baked bread, toured area museums and places of interest (e.g. a Unity Temple and a Jewish synagogue) and so on. The students signed up or what they wanted to do each day, and the parent signed permission slips. Kids/parents paid nominal fees, as required. The school owned a bus, so transportation came out of school funds. And oh yes, all of this was presented ahead of time at a PTA meeting, so the parents would know what would be going on.

a Muslim that sold the IDEA to someone in the School.

Good grief, smoothy. They were studying this in Civics. You don't think a Caucasian would be able to come up with the idea to visit a mosque for a field trip?

Teachers don't have that authority... much less the 6th grade students. Someone approved that trip in the schools administration.

Schools have planning meetings. The teachers and the principal sit around a table on a regular basis and talk about planning and field trips. In my experience, a trip like this didn't have to go above the principal for approval.

someone should be fired and forced to repay the total costs of said trip, and should be charged with missappropriation of school funds and assets.

That's a bit wild and crazy. An apology was made immediately afterwards. That should be sufficient. Are there parents who are wild-eyed about it?

Any proof of which side initiated it? The answer of which actually is irrelevant based on the fact School resources were spent on school hours (all from Taxpayers pockets) to drag kids to a Mosque when equivalent homage isn't allowed to be paid to other major religions.

My years as a teacher tell me the school initiated it. The field trip idea was a good one, but the trip got out of hand. It's sort of like a field trip to the zoo. One student decides to be a showoff and jumps over the fence and is mauled by a tiger. Was the trip a bad idea? No. Was the outcome not so good? Yes.

[smoothy]

Every year our school set aside one week of pure hands-on, practical learning and field trips, but no classes. We took the kids horseback riding, to Maywood Park (horse racing track and heard about the betting process), went to Cosley Park (petting zoo with amazing kinds of animals), had a class on manners and poise, did all kinds of crafts and baked bread, toured area museums and places of interest (e.g., a Unity Temple and a Jewish synagogue) and so on. The students signed up or what they wanted to do each day, and the parent signed permission slips. Kids/parents paid nominal fees, as required. The school owned a bus, so transportation came out of school funds. And oh yes, all of this was presented ahead of time at a PTA meeting, so the parents would know what would be going on.

Good grief, smoothy. They were studying this in Civics. You don't think a Caucasian would be able to come up with the idea to visit a mosque for a field trip?

Schools have planning meetings. The teachers and the principal sit around a table on a regular basis and talk about planning and field trips. In my experience, a trip like this didn't have to go above the principal for approval.

That's a bit wild and crazy. An apology was made immediately afterwards. That should be sufficient. Are there parents who are wild-eyed about it?

You have some strange schools where you live. I went to public schools... and trips need busses... busses have to be paid for because drivers... feul etc... A teacher can't say gimme 3 busses... and they simply say sure just like that, with all the crying about how tight bugets are. I knew too many people that are teachers as well as several who were school administrators. All of this requires spending... teachers don't have check writing authority. THat sort of thing doesn't happen in the School distric I attended , nor the one that's bleeding me dry where I live now. Which is a very well funded school system.

I don't buy the Apology bull... IF there really was an apology its only because they got caught, not because they were sorry they did it..

Typical action of someone pushing an agenda... they just do what they want and appologize later... they got to do what they wanted... they new if they sought approval before they wouldn't get it.

Still teachers don't simply get busses at their request. That tells me higher ups knew about this in advance, (buss drivers aren't like Chaufers waiting for a last minute trip. and yeah I know three school bus drivers too)... and knew it was a violation of the law and didn't care because as long as its part of their agenda they will try to justify it somehow later.

[excon]

The left is currently argueing and pretending Muslims have NEVER tried to do it here, and that it wouldn't be allowed (force Sharia onto Americans)....when in fact it is..

Hello again, smoothy:

So you DO think the Constitution is weak and UNABLE to withstand an assault by a few cab drivers... Dude! For a Constitution loving Tea Partier, you don't think much of it, do you??

excon

[cdad]

Hello again, smoothy:

So you DO think the Constitution is weak and UNABLE to withstand an assault by a few cab drivers.... Dude! For a Constitution loving Tea Partier, you don't think much of it, do you???

excon

Here is where the problem is. How far do you bend for one religion? Did these drivers receive punishment if the rule is to take fares as they appear? Was their license taken away or suspended for forcing their religious belief on others? Lets face it. If you don't want a job that is against your religion then don't take it. Here is yet another example of public spending going to a religion.

LiveLeak.com - Airports Install Foot Wash Basins For Muslims And Their Rituals


Looks like acceptance rather then saying to not violate our laws and regulations.

[speechlesstx]

So you DO think the Constitution is weak and UNABLE to withstand an assault by a few cab drivers.... Dude! For a Constitution loving Tea Partier, you don't think much of it, do you???

You sure seem to think it won't withstand conservatives so why not? Anyway, it's called Sharia creep and it's been underway for years. But that's OK, it's no big deal, right?

[Wondergirl]

I hope Santa brings me a cadet blue burqa for Christmas.

[speechlesstx]

I hope Santa brings me a cadet blue burqa for Christmas.

Well, that sure beats "honor violence," like the thousands of Muslim women in the UK are rewarded with every year.

[smoothy]

Hello again, smoothy:

So you DO think the Constitution is weak and UNABLE to withstand an assault by a few cab drivers.... Dude! For a Constitution loving Tea Partier, you don't think much of it, do you???

excon

Did you read the posts... Sharia IS already being impleminted in Dearborn Michigan, and as arbitration is other places... IN the USA not to mention Europe that is Finally waking up to what a threat to their way of life they allowed in.


YOU want a better compairison... lets talk the Lefts assult on Gun owners rights in conflict with the 2nd amendment... New York City and Chicago... apparently both places you aren't entitled to having 2nd amendment rights. THe Supreme court finally had the Wisdom to force DC to allow law abiding citizens the right to buy and own guns, and not let just the criminals have them.

Being on the left you should be intimately aware of the slow backdoor approach to force something on people that don't want it... incrementally.

Wasn't it Trotsky that wrote it after all, and the Dems have embraced it for decades.

[Wondergirl]

New York City and Chicago....apparently both places you aren't entitled to having 2nd amendment rights

"Apparently" is a big word.

[tomder55]

I hope Santa brings me a cadet blue burqa for Christmas.

Merry Christmas .
The Canvas Prison Ppt Presentation

[smoothy]

"Apparently" is a big word.

Telling the law abiding people in those cities they can't own handguns is a pretty big violation of their constitutional rights. As it was in DC until recently... and the pinheads running the City STILL are trying to deny what the court ordered.

You couldn't pay me enough to live in any of those places.

[Wondergirl]

Telling the law abiding people in those cities they can't own handguns is a pretty big violation of their constitutional rights.

That's not true of Chicago.

[smoothy]

That's not true of Chicago.

Chicago has one of the strictest gun control laws in the country now that DC law was overturned as unconstitutional.

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2...ect-today.html

Seriously you can't even carry you rgun into your own garage, or porch? So you violate the law just bringing it home or to a shooting range?

There should be NO restictions to gun ownership assuming you are not a Fellon or have diagnosed mental issues.

The only justification for liscenseing them is so they know who and what to take if the gun grabbers ever get the upper hand.

After all, you don't need a license to run off at the mouth in public. Or have kids... and both of those cause far more problems than gun ownership.

[Wondergirl]

Chicago has one of the strictest gun control laws in the country

Key provisions of the ordinance include:
* Firearm sales will be banned in the city.
* Gun training totaling four hours in a classroom and an hour on a firing range will be required before getting a permit. But firing ranges are banned, so training must be completed outside Chicago.
* To transport a gun, it will have to be "broken down," not immediately accessible, unloaded, and in a firearm case.
* Firearms may be possessed only inside the dwelling. It will be illegal to have a gun in the garage, on porches or in the yard. Guns also will not be allowed in hotels, dorms and group-living facilities.

If I had my way, ALL guns would disappear. Let them fight it out with broom handles.

[smoothy]

Key provisions of the ordinance include:
* Firearm sales will be banned in the city.
* Gun training totaling four hours in a classroom and an hour on a firing range will be required before getting a permit. But firing ranges are banned, so training must be completed outside Chicago.
* To transport a gun, it will have to be "broken down," not immediately accessible, unloaded, and in a firearm case.
* Firearms may be possessed only inside the dwelling. It will be illegal to have a gun in the garage, on porches or in the yard. Guns also will not be allowed in hotels, dorms and group-living facilities.

If I had my way, ALL guns would disappear. Let them fight it out with broom handles.

And the problem with what YOU just said is we ALL have the same right to have those weapons as you have to make that comment. Which is any less important... the 1st amendment or the second that assures you will actually have the 1st in the near future?

Or your right to defend yourseklf on your own property... something Chicago seems to think you can't do because you might shoot a criminal who is likely to be a registered democrat assulting you or robbing your house.

And there were cases in DC in recent years where an armed robber got shot and sometimes killed DURING an armed robbery and the City went after the home owner more aggressively than the robber... and cases where the robber sued the homeowner for shooting them DURING the robbery, and won.

Just some of the reasons I refuse to live in any leftytowns. Here in VA I have a right to a concealed carry permit (meaning they have to give it to me unless they can present a compelling legal reason NOT to)... the right to own unregistered weapons... don't have to pay ANY license fee to exercise my 2nd amendment rights, and I can shoot and kill any attempted robber... armed or not as long as I "feel" threatened by them on my own property... or as self defense off my property.

Yes... Virginia among others allows open carry without a license most places. Robbers never know who's carrying and who isn't, Unlike places like Chicago and NYC. Apparently residents of Chicago and NYC lack the maturity and emotional restraint to have or carry loaded weapons.