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.

 

Obama's Request to Cover Christian Symbol

page: 5
7
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


Gee .....

I don't hate Obama , heck I don't even know him and I have pointed this out a number of times ........

Yes I know that the building was built before he took office as I am sure the other place was built before he took office as well , even though the one with the religious symbol had to be modified for his visit ..

Anyway I wish you well and I thank you for your post .

And please note that through out this entire thread I have not said anything bad about Obama , if you don't believe me just read what I have said .




posted on May, 4 2009 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by looneylupinsrevenge
 


star for you and thanks for conversing with me as aposed to jumping all over me simply because I used the word Obama and Christian .



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Max_TO
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


Gee .....

I don't hate Obama , heck I don't even know him and I have pointed this out a number of times ........

Yes I know that the building was built before he took office as I am sure the other place was built before he took office as well , even though the one with the religious symbol had to be modified for his visit ..


So when did Obama visit "The Seals Lair?" How are you missing this. He was giving a speach in front of this symbol he had covered up. How can you compare that to a building he has nothing to do with, including never given a speach in front of?????

Apples and oranges my friend. If he gave a speach in front of the naval base and did not ask them to change the shape of it, then you would have an argument and I would be completely on your side. He has not. Stop trying to wedge it in here. This is about the speach hid actually did give and what happened there. You cannot compare it to things that did not happen.

Anyway I wish you well and I thank you for your post .

And please note that through out this entire thread I have not said anything bad about Obama , if you don't believe me just read what I have said .



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


The point that I was trying to make is that before the government concerns them selves with other peoples symbols then perhaps they should start with government builds .

But seeing just how nice of a guy Obama is you can bet he will have it redesigned



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Max_TO
 


Your point is insane at best. He did not build that building. He did not have one thing to do with it in any fashion ever. He was going to be seen around the world giving a speach and did not want any ONE PARTICULAR religion standing in the shot. That would be as good as promoting that symbol. You can argue the government is promoting nazis but Obama is not. He had nothing to do with the building.

Like I said, when he gives a speach in front of it, you will have a point. Right now, you do not have one. I know what you are trying to say and it is not a point. It is just another reason to be hateful.



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by evil incarnate
reply to post by Max_TO
 


Your point is insane at best. He did not build that building. He did not have one thing to do with it in any fashion ever. .


??? What ???

Ok first off my ill informed friend Mr. Obama in addition to being one heck of a nice guy , as per the reports , he is also THE COMMANDER IN CHEIF , so yes he does have something to do with that build , a lot actually .

And then ...

He was going to be seen around the world giving a speach and did not want any ONE PARTICULAR religion standing in the shot.

You are quite frankly WRONG on that statement , that was not the reported reason as to why it was covered . Also seeing how the rest of the world has the benefit of not being taught by the public schools of America they CAN TELL ITS A PHOTO OP . and don't assume that he is endorsing the symbol in so said picture .



You can argue the government is promoting nazis but Obama is not.


Ok ??


I know what you are trying to say and it is not a point. It is just another reason to be hateful.


Sorry I didn't want you to hate me



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Max_TO
??? What ???

Ok first off my ill informed friend Mr. Obama in addition to being one heck of a nice guy , as per the reports , he is also THE COMMANDER IN CHEIF , so yes he does have something to do with that build , a lot actually .


So being commander in chief makes him also a time traveler? I am completely failing to see how being commander in chief makes him in any way related to the construction of that building.


You are quite frankly WRONG on that statement , that was not the reported reason as to why it was covered . Also seeing how the rest of the world has the benefit of not being taught by the public schools of America they CAN TELL ITS A PHOTO OP . and don't assume that he is endorsing the symbol in so said picture .


Don't assume his is endorsing the image in the photo? You said yourself, it was a photo op. It was staged in a particular manner. That means they controlled the forground as well as the background. Why don't you just tell us what the reported reason is then? Maybe you and I know better than to automatically believe that he is endorsing the symbol in the picture makes no difference. You and I were not the intended audience. The majority of America was.


Sorry I didn't want you to hate me


Huh? When did I express any hate? It is you that insists upon blaming Obama for a naval base shaped like a swastika that was built when....?



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


Dear God ....

Ok either you refuse to understand the underlining issue in this matter as far as I was concerned or you think I am out and out lying about how I feel .

Either way it doesn't matter as nothing as a result in my life or yours will change as a result of this thread .

I could ramble on repeating my self to yet again express my thoughts on this topic , but alas , thats been done .

I will also mention that I can understand the irritation that you express over this topic , given the amount of bogus threads that are in fact started about Obama and to be honest that was not my intention at all .

I would humbly suggest that you take one more look at my posts in this thread and give me the benefit of the doubt and try and see it from my intended purpose , wether you agree with it or not .

I will in turn reread what I wrote and I will try and see it from the point of view , that this was nothing more then an Obama basing thread , so that I can better see your point of view .

I will admit once again that I did express poor judgment in the title of this thread . If I had it to do all over again I would have worded it much differently and made the title express my intended meaning a little better and I would have used the term government instead of Obama and I would have also said religious symbol instead of Christian symbol .

If one looks at my over all posting and thread history , not just this thread , one will quickly learn that I do not bash anyone , including Obama .


Once again thanks for your post .



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Max_TO
 


So this is how you back away from the corner I just pinned you into? I asked a legitimate question of you. I put up a legitimate argument. I was not insulting or combative but provocative at best. I do not understand how you can compare Obama staging a photo op to a building that already exists and he is not getting his photo taken in front of.

Why do you think he covered it up then? What is your real theory as to the reasoning behind it?



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by evil incarnate
reply to post by Max_TO
 


So this is how you back away from the corner I just pinned you into? I asked a legitimate question of you. I put up a legitimate argument. I was not insulting or combative but provocative at best. I do not understand how you can compare Obama staging a photo op to a building that already exists and he is not getting his photo taken in front of.

Why do you think he covered it up then? What is your real theory as to the reasoning behind it?



Ok my friend if you want to know the reported reason as to why the symbol was covered I challenge you to read the past posts and you will find the stated answer .

Ok now as for your next question , my only point was simply this , if the government is going to start picking out symbols that they want covered in the public arena well then they better straiten out any potential offensive symbolism located in government buildings first .

No elected official should ever have the right to tell a place or person what they can or can not do if it is a right granted by the constitution . If they government has an issue with how a person or place is expressing there constitutional right well then the government has the right to simply not go to the place .

And for the record I never did compare Obama staging a photo op to a building that already exists and he is not getting his photo taken in front of , you did that by drawing conclusions .

Also for the record , the President is " in charge " of every government building , for better or for worse wether he has his picture taken there or not , you can bet they have his picture on the wall of every office in the place . And if someone wants to " clean things up " what better place then starting with there own back yard .


[edit on 5-5-2009 by Max_TO]



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by evil incarnate
reply to post by Max_TO
 


So this is how you back away from the corner I just pinned you into? I asked a legitimate question of you. I put up a legitimate argument. I was not insulting or combative but provocative at best. I do not understand how you can compare Obama staging a photo op to a building that already exists and he is not getting his photo taken in front of.

Why do you think he covered it up then? What is your real theory as to the reasoning behind it?



Ok my friend if you want to know the reported reason as to why the symbol was covered I challenge you to read the past posts and you will find the stated answer .

Ok now as for your next question , my only point was simply this , if the government is going to start picking out symbols that they want covered in the public arena well then they better straiten out any potential offensive symbolism located in government buildings first .

No elected official should ever have the right to tell a place or person what they can or can not do if it is a right granted by the constitution . If they government has an issue with how a person or place is expressing there constitutional right well then the government has the right to simply not go to the place .

Also for the record , the President is " in charge " of every government building , for better or for worse wether he has his picture taken there or not , you can bet they have his picture there , located on the wall of every office in the place . And if someone wants to " clean things up " what better place then starting with there own back yard , rather then taking issue with a place that is acting within there guarantied rights as stated by the constitution .


[edit on 5-5-2009 by Max_TO]

[edit on 5-5-2009 by Max_TO]

[edit on 5-5-2009 by Max_TO]



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Max_TO
Ok now as for your next question , my only point was simply this , if the government is going to start picking out symbols that they want covered in the public arena well then they better straiten out any potential offensive symbolism located in government buildings first .


I cannot believe I am actually addressing this yet again. I know what your point is. I have already stated it back to you. I am not saying I do not get your point. I am saying it is not really a point. There is a huge difference between the government suddenly taking up with symbols and their rights to be displayed. This is a man giving a speach in front of something. That is soooooooo completely different than a government sanctioned building that was already their when he was elected and he is not giving a speach in front of.

How about this. Did he tear down the stature? So why should he tear down the building. What he did was not appear in front of the statue. I do not see him appearing in front of that building either. Now what?


No elected official should ever have the right to tell a place or person what they can or can not do if it is a right granted by the constitution . If they government has an issue with how a person or place is expressing there constitutional right well then the government has the right to simply not go to the place .


Then they should not have allowed him to speak there. Was he invited or did he just march in and say he is covering up stuff and giving a speach?

You do realize that as a guest speaker anywhere, it is THEIR obligation to set a comfortable stage for you. You have apparently never worked on stage.

You have lost it completely. You sound like the president went to a church and tore down Jesus. All he did was ask that a statue be covered behind him while he gave a speach. The statue is still there isn't it? Is it covered now?

Back to your Obama hating rant


Also for the record , the President is " in charge " of every government building , for better or for worse wether he has his picture taken there or not , you can bet they have his picture there , located on the wall of every office in the place . And if someone wants to " clean things up " what better place then starting with there own back yard , rather then taking issue with a place that is acting within there guarantied rights as stated by the constitution .


WOW. That is really all I can say. You hate this man so much that you really have to stretch the logic out that far? This is one of the most insipid conversations I have ever had. I am sorry I even entertained you for a second now. You are so obviously just looking for a reason to hate on the man or the government. Your comparisons are way off. You want a building torn down because a statue was covered for a little bit. Yeah that makes sense. Oh wait, I can go see the statue still. I can go and look right at it. So......the building should be demolished because........

We all know what your point is. It is just really kind of stupid.



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


It makes no difference what I say , you continue to believe that the symbol was covered because it was there desire to not associate with the symbol based on its religious merit
and it has been shown earlier in this thread that that wasn't the case .

Why do you continue to assume and not check ?


However if the government ever does decide to get into the business of telling people what they can and cant display then they had better be prepared to answer for there symbols as well .

Why do you say or think its ok for the government to " request " a place hide a symbol if the public can't make the same request of there government ?

Do you even understand that the government doesn't have the right to tell a person what they can do as long as the person in within there constitutional rights ?

If you do understand that then why would you ever make the case for any government to cover anyones belief or tradition ?



Gee there you go again calling me a hater again


Perhaps you can tell me my point ?

as my direct words and illustrations simply allude you .



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


Who said tear it down ??

Are you over stating something again ? Drawing conclusions based on your bigatry again ?



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
I am done with this as its pointless you refuse to read what was said you ignore what I say so that you can tell me what I say then when I try to explain you call me names .

Done bye bye



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Max_TO
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


Who said tear it down ??

Are you over stating something again ? Drawing conclusions based on your bigatry again ?


You did not say tear it down? What is it you did say then before I go back a few pages and quote you.



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Max_TO
I am done with this as its pointless you refuse to read what was said you ignore what I say so that you can tell me what I say then when I try to explain you call me names .

Done bye bye


Good. It is about time you realize that there are threads to go hate Obama on and this is just not one of them. Sorry.



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   

there are threads to go hate Obama on and this is just not one of them. Sorry.


Wow I am glad you finally listened to what I was saying and admit to the fact that this thread nor me hate Obama .




posted on May, 6 2009 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Max_TO

there are threads to go hate Obama on and this is just not one of them. Sorry.


Wow I am glad you finally listened to what I was saying and admit to the fact that this thread nor me hate Obama .



I guess there really is no hope in having an actual intellectual conversation with you. I quite clearly stated that YOU ARE TRYING TO JUST HATE OBAMA. Not this thread, but yes you!



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 08:32 AM
link   
Here is one to add to the list

Obama to be prayer day no-show


President Obama is distancing himself from the National Day of Prayer by nixing a formal early morning service and not attending a large Catholic prayer breakfast the next morning.


www.washingtontimes.com...
There is no longer any doubt in my mind something is terribly wrong with this man

[edit on 083131p://bWednesday2009 by Stormdancer777]




top topics



 
7
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join