"Ground Zero" mosque approved, Obama supports

[Enadail]

The fact that he's an immigrant is irrelevant, as we don't treat immigrated Americans different from non-immigrant Americans.

No, it's not irrelevant because it makes his comparison bullshit, he deliberately made those Christians Arab natives, which subtly changes the context, if it didn't mean anything, why the fuck would he mention it, and why the fuck would he say my comparison is wrong?

Where exactly did he specify that they were natives?

He specified they were Arabs, the only way that could change anything is if there was an implication of them being native, otherwise, it doesn't make the slightest bit of difference, and does nothing to undermine my comparison.

You are aware Arab is not a nationality or culture? Its really only a broad term for people from a general region from the world, in the same way of calling someone South Asian doesn't really say anything about where they're from specifically, what they're like, their culture, etc? And the term is so broad, many people can't identify a non Arab from an Arab?

[Dyakovo]

So? Are all Arabs from Iraq?

Can you read the exchange before attempting to be a smart-ass:

Baghdad Christian Arabs

I did. Now answer the question.

[Enadail]

So? Are all Arabs from Iraq?

Can you read the exchange before attempting to be a smart-ass:

Baghdad Christian Arabs

Uh... is that like saying New York City Muslims? Because I do believe those in charge of this community center fall under that... Again, no immigration status implied.

[Xsyne]

So? Are all Arabs from Iraq?

Can you read the exchange before attempting to be a smart-ass:

Baghdad Christian Arabs

You can live somewhere without being a native, you know.

[Sdaeriji]

So? Are all Arabs from Iraq?

Can you read the exchange before attempting to be a smart-ass:

Baghdad Christian Arabs

You're reaching. He did not imply. You inferred.

[Dyakovo]

So? Are all Arabs from Iraq?

Can you read the exchange before attempting to be a smart-ass:

Baghdad Christian Arabs

Uh... is that like saying New York City Muslims? Because I do believe those in charge of this community center fall under that... Again, no immigration status implied.

It would be exactly like that...

Hyde2 is just demonstrating that he doesn't have a clue as to what he's talking about.

[Hyde2]

You are aware Arab is not a nationality or culture? Its really only a broad term for people from a general region from the world, in the same way of calling someone South Asian doesn't really say anything about where they're from specifically, what they're like, their culture, etc? And the term is so broad, many people can't identify a non Arab from an Arab?

So them being Arabs from Baghdad is completely irrelevant, and does nothing to undermine my initial comparison? Thanks for supporting my argument.

[Maurepas]

I believe I now understand what I once heard, that "the Western world is so pathetic that it deserves to fall".

Yep. Freedom of religion will kill us all.

Just like the Pilgrims said,

[Hyde2]

Uh... is that like saying New York City Muslims? Because I do believe those in charge of this community center fall under that... Again, no immigration status implied.

If it is, then the fact that they are Arabs is irrelevant, so him saying that changes nothing, so my comparison is valid.

[Hyde2]

Hyde2 is just demonstrating that he doesn't have a clue as to what he's talking about.

Explain this to me. You're the one constructing this stupid strawman where I apparently said all Arabs were from Iraq, when I said nothing of the sort. All I implied was that all people from Baghdad are from Baghdad.

[Hyde2]

You're reaching. He did not imply. You inferred.

What are you talking about? He didn't imply they were from Baghdad? No, he didn't, he explicitly stated such.

[Dyakovo]

Hyde2 is just demonstrating that he doesn't have a clue as to what he's talking about.

Explain this to me. You're the one constructing this stupid strawman where I apparently said all Arabs were from Iraq, when I said nothing of the sort. All I implied was that all people from Baghdad are from Baghdad.

He didn't say that the person was originally from Baghdad, you assumed that they were native because he also included the descriptor "Arab".

[Sdaeriji]

You're reaching. He did not imply. You inferred.

What are you talking about? He didn't imply they were from Baghdad? No, he didn't, he explicitly stated such.

He didn't imply they were natives. You assumed.

[Hyde2]

He didn't say that the person was originally from Baghdad, you assumed that they were native because he also included the descriptor "Arab".

No I didn't assume that, I already specifically said that he MUST have been implying such, otherwise his comparison is not meaningfully different from mine in anyway. Either he meant they were natives, and everything you were saying previously was bullshit, or he didn't mean such, therefore making my original comparison no different from his.

[Enadail]

Uh... is that like saying New York City Muslims? Because I do believe those in charge of this community center fall under that... Again, no immigration status implied.

If it is, then the fact that they are Arabs is irrelevant, so him saying that changes nothing, so my comparison is valid.

Saying your comparison is valid does not make it so.

Your argument was that this is like non-native foreigners placing a memorial of that foreign nation on a location where those non-native foreigners killed natives.

His argument was that no, this is like natives (regardless of immigrant or not) placed a memorial of their own kind on native soil.

Given this is a case of Americans building something on American soil, his argument was correct.

Arab was irrelevant, as it was irrelevant identifier, like saying the parties involved have brown hair. Your argument however, was still flawed.

[Hyde2]

You're reaching. He did not imply. You inferred.

What are you talking about? He didn't imply they were from Baghdad? No, he didn't, he explicitly stated such.

He didn't imply they were natives. You assumed.

Read below, I assumed two options, either his comparison was not meaningfully different from mine and his post was nonsense, or by the use of Arab he was trying to act as if they were native Christians with a long ancestry there, that's the only way it could make a difference (and not inherently so either). Why the second option? Because he was clearly trying to undermine my use of American, which implies them to be non native.

[Enadail]

He didn't say that the person was originally from Baghdad, you assumed that they were native because he also included the descriptor "Arab".

No I didn't assume that, I already specifically said that he MUST have been implying such, otherwise his comparison is not meaningfully different from mine in anyway. Either he meant they were natives, and everything you were saying previously was bullshit, or he didn't mean such, therefore making my original comparison no different from his.

No, his argument of nativity didn't come from arab at all, but from Baghdad, but did not imply immigrant or not. Your argument was completely different.

[Hyde2]

His argument was that no, this is like natives (regardless of immigrant or not) placed a memorial of their own kind on native soil.

Oh for fucks sake. So they ARE natives? Make up your god damn mind.

Given this is a case of Americans building something on American soil, his argument was correct.

No, because they are not natives, so the comparison is not valid.

[Unchecked Expansion]

His argument was that no, this is like natives (regardless of immigrant or not) placed a memorial of their own kind on native soil.

Oh for fucks sake. So they ARE natives? Make up your god damn mind.

Given this is a case of Americans building something on American soil, his argument was correct.

No, because they are not natives, so the comparison is not valid.

They're American citizens, providing services for American citizens. They're native

[Hyde2]

No, his argument of nativity didn't come from arab at all, but from Baghdad

Yet others have given me scorn for saying that the word Baghdad implied the were native, you included. You can't even be consistent.

[Dyakovo]

He didn't say that the person was originally from Baghdad, you assumed that they were native because he also included the descriptor "Arab".

No I didn't assume that...

Really?

he deliberately made those Christians Arab natives,

Apparently you are/were unaware of the fact that your words don't just magically disappear after you type them...

[Hyde2]

They're American citizens, providing services for American citizens. They're native

I didn't say the Americans in Baghdad didn't have citizenship there.

[Enadail]

His argument was that no, this is like natives (regardless of immigrant or not) placed a memorial of their own kind on native soil.

Oh for fucks sake. So they ARE natives? Make up your god damn mind.

I never argued it wasn't a nativity issue... it was a immigration issue.

Given this is a case of Americans building something on American soil, his argument was correct.

No, because they are not natives, so the comparison is not valid.

... if they're not natives, then no one in the US is native... given even the Native Americans came from a land bridge to the Americas. Once you naturalize, you are an American, regardless of if you came here a day ago or were born here. Your decision that you only count as native if you're born here is false and irrelevant.

[Hyde2]

Apparently you are/were unaware of the fact that your words don't just magically disappear after you type them...

It's funny how others are seemingly conceding that he DID mean natives. And the fucking fact that I said native as a separate term in a sentence that included Arab further undermines this weird notion you have that I apparently think Arab is synonymous with Iraq native.

[Enadail]

No, his argument of nativity didn't come from arab at all, but from Baghdad

Yet others have given me scorn for saying that the word Baghdad implied the were native, you included. You can't even be consistent.

Really? Show me where I said it was a question of nativity? From the start, I said it was about immigration. But of course, from your other post, you seem to have a different view of nativity, even from logical standards, so I'm not surprised there's confusion and inconsistency.