It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
shouting that Muslims and shouldn't be selling alcohol
Originally posted by saint4God
Does insurance cover this kind of thing? Do you think insurance companies will start "adding a clause"?
Many insurance policies have a war clause, under which losses caused as a result of acts of war are excluded from coverage. The term "war" is defined in different ways, depending on the policy. Barron Wall explains that The Businessowners Special Property Coverage Form (BP 00 02 01 97) and the Causes of Loss (Special) Form (CP 10 30 06 95), which are both published by the Insurance Services Office, Inc., (ISO) are adopted by many insurance carriers, and have similarly worded definitions of "war." "War," according to the language used by ISO in these policy forms, would include "undeclared or civil war" and "warlike action by a military force," says Wall.
Originally posted by kenshiro2012
If it was extremists that commited the robbery, then the insurance may use this clause as a way to not have to pay the owners. The reason that I bring this up is that extremists have made it clear a numbert of times that they are waging a war on the west and non-believers in their version of Islam.
Most U.S. policy forms expressly exclude coverage for losses caused by "war" but not by "terrorism." Will various insurance policy forms cover the losses arising from the September 11th attack? This issue will be determined by the language of the acts of war exclusion, if any, in the particular policy under which the claim arises. Generally, most major U.S. insurers are taking the position that coverage for losses arising from the September 11 attack is not excluded under war exclusions unless "terrorism" or "acts of terrorism" are specifically excluded.
Originally posted by kenshiro2012
There was a difference in regards to 9/11.
9/11 was designated as an "act of terrorism: and not an act of war.
Since 9/11, most insurance companies have revised their policies to include "acts of terrorism.
The reason why there are Muslim vs Muslims tension is because the Arab store owners are taking advantage of a situtation instead of following the Koran
Originally posted by djohnsto77
Several Arab-owned liquor stores in Oakland, California were
vandalized apparently by other Muslims appearing to be
Nation of Islam members,
Originally posted by roro2030
Just because something is legal doesn't mean it should be done. I know full well Arabs/Koreans/Vietnemes wouldn't appreciate blacks overruning their neighborhoods /w liquor stores. these poor black areas are too depressed and opening one liquor store after another doesn't help. What's worst most of these places are eyesores. Black areas need a uplifting hand not another oppersor.
Originally posted by roro2030These young men got sick and tired of the endless cycle of poverty gripping these neighborhoods and what's sad the police will try to make examples out of them instead of figuring out why they are so mad.
Originally posted by roro2030Saint I just want you go to black area and then a white area.