|
Post by Big Lin on Jul 11, 2016 22:14:00 GMT
Nor do Islamophobes it seems. Now I'm getting rather sick of feeling like I'm a teacher addressing a bunch of 5-year old kids. The simple FACT is that NO ONE - now or EVER - not at ANY time in history - spoke a language called ROMAN. The language of the Roman Empire was Latin. NOT Roman. Why don't you just accept that French is - as usual - FACTUALLY WRONG? I'm beginning to feel like I'm addressing a convention of Flat-Earthists! Big Lin, you can refer to all of us or some of us as 5-year old kids or Flat-Earthists or those accused of Islamophobia or any disparaging descriptive term that you want, but that will make little difference as from my perspective you are not reading what is written here. The City of Rome was a world community in that it was comprised of all sorts of people and cultures. Obviously they spoke Latin and did so as representing differing versions of societal groups within the Latin world. So too with Greek as it was the language of the educated and the language of logical interchanges of rhetoric, and there were languages of the Germanic peoples in all of the differing Celtic people languages, and obviously there was Hebrew, and on and on and on. The acceptance and use of multiple languages was a very Roman trait in that they did little to force people to change their local beliefs and activities and so too with language. To speak Roman was to speak in the languages of Rome. That doesn’t seem difficult to understand. A FACT is a FACT. Not ONE person - in the entire history of the human race - EVER spoke 'Roman.' It's got NOTHING to do with multiple languages or anything else. It's a simple FACT that there never WAS a language called 'Roman.' I don't know why you can't grasp that simple point. That is just ONE of MANY of the FACTUAL AND PROVABLE ERRORS French makes.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Jul 11, 2016 23:19:01 GMT
Peaceful Muslims who integrate into Western Society aren't the problem Scottish Lassie. They're irrelevant. It is the fanatical hard core extremist Muslims, Like ISIS and their supporters, who are the problem. If only 1 in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000, or 1 in 10000 turns out to be a mass murderer then better not to admit any of them. The total lack of logic in that post is almost unbelievable. I really am disappointed to see you sounding like a Flat Earthist, BA. To say that the fact that the majority of Muslims DO act peacefully within Western Society is 'irrelevant' is rather like saying that the majority of Americans who do NOT commit crimes is 'irrelevant.' If only 1 in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10000 turns out to be a murderer then better not to admit ANY Americans to foreign countries. Can't you honestly see how irrational your attitude is? I do despair, sometimes, I really do. If I'm not having to fight the loony left I'm having to fight the rabid right. Why don't all you extremists try and take a deep breath and start working on the basis of facts and logic rather than ignorance and prejudice? Lin - What I meant to say is 'irrelevant to the problem of terrorism.' That is, the majority peaceful muslims aren't responsible for terrorist attacks like those in Paris, San Bernardino, and Orlando. This is elementary Lin. If we admit no Muslims, we admit no Muslim terrorists. On the other hand, and more importantly, if we admit 10,000 Muslims there are bound to be some sleeper terrorist cells amongst them. Weigh off the pros and cons. Seems obvious to me. Admit zero and problem solved. Why in the world would you want to do anything else?
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jul 12, 2016 1:00:52 GMT
Big Lin, you can refer to all of us or some of us as 5-year old kids or Flat-Earthists or those accused of Islamophobia or any disparaging descriptive term that you want, but that will make little difference as from my perspective you are not reading what is written here. The City of Rome was a world community in that it was comprised of all sorts of people and cultures. Obviously they spoke Latin and did so as representing differing versions of societal groups within the Latin world. So too with Greek as it was the language of the educated and the language of logical interchanges of rhetoric, and there were languages of the Germanic peoples in all of the differing Celtic people languages, and obviously there was Hebrew, and on and on and on. The acceptance and use of multiple languages was a very Roman trait in that they did little to force people to change their local beliefs and activities and so too with language. To speak Roman was to speak in the languages of Rome. That doesn’t seem difficult to understand. A FACT is a FACT. Not ONE person - in the entire history of the human race - EVER spoke 'Roman.' It's got NOTHING to do with multiple languages or anything else. It's a simple FACT that there never WAS a language called 'Roman.' I don't know why you can't grasp that simple point. That is just ONE of MANY of the FACTUAL AND PROVABLE ERRORS French makes. Dear Big Lin , Whether we talk of a Roman language, an American language or a British language is up to us to decide and the reference to a "Roman language" as I've shown on a previous post is used by some people. We both in our own way like a purity of language, but expressions that one or both of us don't wish to accept will be used.
Dr. Warren simply avoided saying the inhabitants of the Roman empire spoke Latin because most people at that time spoke "Vulgar Latin", which was arguably no longer Latin anymore than Italian is. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgar_Latin True "Roman language" is an expression that refers to the language or languages of the Romans, etc. and not a particular language. SPLC fell flat on it's face trying to twist that one around to something else.
slideplayer.com/slide/6981551/
slideplayer.com/slide/7976302/
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2016 3:02:18 GMT
The total lack of logic in that post is almost unbelievable. I really am disappointed to see you sounding like a Flat Earthist, BA. To say that the fact that the majority of Muslims DO act peacefully within Western Society is 'irrelevant' is rather like saying that the majority of Americans who do NOT commit crimes is 'irrelevant.' If only 1 in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10000 turns out to be a murderer then better not to admit ANY Americans to foreign countries. Can't you honestly see how irrational your attitude is? I do despair, sometimes, I really do. If I'm not having to fight the loony left I'm having to fight the rabid right. Why don't all you extremists try and take a deep breath and start working on the basis of facts and logic rather than ignorance and prejudice? Lin - What I meant to say is 'irrelevant to the problem of terrorism.' That is, the majority peaceful muslims aren't responsible for terrorist attacks like those in Paris, San Bernardino, and Orlando. This is elementary Lin. If we admit no Muslims, we admit no Muslim terrorists. On the other hand, and more importantly, if we admit 10,000 Muslims there are bound to be some sleeper terrorist cells amongst them. Weigh off the pros and cons. Seems obvious to me. Admit zero and problem solved. Why in the world would you want to do anything else? I give up Big Lin. Your belief is cast in concrete and your obsessive hatred of Bill Warren is an absolute barrier to any discussion on this point.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Mar 22, 2017 18:34:56 GMT
Things leftist liberals don't want to hear.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 22, 2017 18:43:37 GMT
Things leftist liberals don't want to hear. Excellent video Anna. Thanks for putting it up here.
|
|