Started By
Message

re: Apt Complex Requires Tenant To Remove US Flag - "Threat to Muslim Community"

Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:19 am to
Posted by Napoleon
Kenna
Member since Dec 2007
69211 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:19 am to
quote:

Are you against the rights of private business owners to do as they please with their own property?




While I agree with you on the Hypocrisy of the right (and our side too).
I have to say I think it's shitty to tell an American to take down an American flag.
I would let a tenant fly any flag they wanted. (except the Confederate Battle Flag and the German WW2 flag).
Hell there are places in Baton Rouge flying the Iranian flag (Persian rug stores). I really wouldn't care.

Posted by Gmorgan4982
Member since May 2005
101750 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:24 am to
Tran jumps to the "appease the Muslims" argument/whining. I wonder which Poli Board poster is Tran.
Posted by cwill
Member since Jan 2005
54753 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:26 am to
quote:

Well, it's what was posted in the OP, so people discuss it from that perspective. That's generally how threads work.


Yes, generally, if it fits people's preconceived notions, they are completely unskeptical...and most never read the article.

quote:

I get your point, but you are still taking a story and deciding to just call it a lie rather than discuss it on it's face.


I'm not going to unblinkingly believe that story on it's face...it was nearly preposterous in the first reading and after Puma posted the apt ownership statement it was obviously false.
Posted by thetempleowl
dallas, tx
Member since Jul 2008
14850 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:27 am to
quote:

Well, it's what was posted in the OP, so people discuss it from that perspective.


Uh, no. Maybe if you are a moron that is how it works. Normally people try to find out the correct facts before discussing something.

Excuse me, normally that is the way many smart people at least have discussions. They rarely continue to be mad at an apartment complex after the facts have come to light and demonstrate that they were mislead by the original story.

quote:

I get your point, but you are still taking a story and deciding to just call it a lie rather than discuss it on it's face.


On its face, the apartment complex did nothing wrong and the person likely lied.

quote:

Again, you could be right, but if people changed parts of the story to suit their argument, discussion would be impossible.


Considering the apartment complex displays an american flag at their entrance, and their side of the story makes sense and the other persons story doesn't make sense, which one do you think is the correct one?

Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
50770 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:27 am to
quote:

and most never read the article


It's a video too. The reaction from both parties in the video is what makes Mr. Tran's story seem more probable in my opinion.
Posted by cwill
Member since Jan 2005
54753 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:27 am to
quote:

I doubt the people making that statement are the same ones who told him not to fly the flag.


Of course not, but the person who told him to take it down did so based on the Apt complex policy.
Posted by cwill
Member since Jan 2005
54753 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:28 am to
quote:

It's interesting how quickly some folks will call someone a liar if it doesn't fit their narrative. What proof do we have that Mr. Tran is lying?


The assemblage of facts.
Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
50770 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:29 am to
quote:

correct facts before discussing something


I've searched. You won't find anything other than the facts posted in the OP. Every other story is basically taking what I linked word-for-word.

The statement from the apartment complex does add something else to the story but really doesn't mention the conversation Mr. Tran had with their representative and doesn't deny his claims. It wouldn't make any sense for them to say anything else.
This post was edited on 6/20/14 at 10:30 am
Posted by thetempleowl
dallas, tx
Member since Jul 2008
14850 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:30 am to
quote:

What proof do we have that Mr. Tran is lying?


Which story makes more sense, considering the apartment complex already displays an american flag right at their entrance?

Why are you being this dense? Because you bought into a stupid story that really makes no sense and most people of even moronic intelligence would look at and say, that there story doesn't make a lot of sense?

Think about the likelihood of what is more likely to be the truth. One story makes sense, the other doesn't
Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
50770 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:30 am to
quote:

The assemblage of facts


So the statement from the apartment complex must be taken as fact?
Posted by GRTiger
On a roof eating alligator pie
Member since Dec 2008
63225 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:32 am to
quote:

thetempleowl


You need to go frick yourself. I'll continue to talk to others who share your opinion but aren't so insecure that they feel the need to call others morons.

Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
50770 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:33 am to
Hopefully you are correct and the guy is making things up. That still hasn't been shown. I'm still confused by why the apartment complex doesn't think where his flag sits is "safe" but the flag they fly out front is being flown "safely." What does that even mean? If he could fly it inside his balcony doesn't that mean he could just put it on the inside of the bars and then be in compliance? That wouldn't change anything about the positioning but would meet the wording they put forth. That doesn't make sense and would change nothing in terms of "safety" from a fire safety standpoint. It seems the logical conclusion is their statement just adds more holes to their story.
This post was edited on 6/20/14 at 10:38 am
Posted by Volvagia
Fort Worth
Member since Mar 2006
51916 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:35 am to
quote:

If you don't want this to happen it should be in the lease contract.


This.

You can't hold me to a contract, and them come back later and revise change it to suit you but still expect me to hold to the contract.


The lease agreement needs to outline the entire tenet/owner agreement. Owner can't come back later and say he has a different opinion or stance on something without voiding the agreement.

If the policy really is in accordance with the lease, I don't have a problem.
This post was edited on 6/20/14 at 10:41 am
Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
50770 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:37 am to
quote:

The lease agreement needs to outline the entire tenet/owner agreement. Owner can't come back later and say he has a different opinion or stance on something without voiding the agreement.


I totally agree with this. Seems like the other argument is just to jump in and say Mr. Tran is lying and the apartment complex is completely honest without wanting to see the lease agreement.
Posted by cwill
Member since Jan 2005
54753 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:38 am to
quote:

So the statement from the apartment complex must be taken as fact?


Its statement of policy? Yes.

And use common sense (a term I hate, but applicable).
Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
50770 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:39 am to
quote:

Its statement of policy? Yes.


Why is it we just assume this was in the lease contract?
Posted by thetempleowl
dallas, tx
Member since Jul 2008
14850 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:40 am to
quote:

Based on what?


Reality. The most likely scenario go have occurred. The story where you have to make the least number of outrageous leaps to make the story work.

quote:

We have one side of the story based on the conversation Mr. Tran had with the apartment complexes representative.


Which doesn't make sense.

quote:

We don't have a statement from that representative.


We have a statement from the apartment complex which makes total sense and says he can display the flag, but only following certain rules, which apply to situation like this.

This comment makes total sense.

quote:

Do you know all Muslims in the US?


Did I say this?

quote:

Would you say all Muslims are proud to be in the US?


Only a moron would even think I said that...

Oh, I am seeing a theme here...

quote:

Do you think any Muslims in this country hate the US?


That would be akin to asking if I think the person starting this thread is an unreasonable fool who bought into a ridiculous non story.

The same answer applies.

quote:

Is it possible for someone living in the US to still hate the country?


Same example and answer to the above.

But the fact is these questions are totally off the story and do not apply one bit to the situation being discussed.

quote:

Do US citizens of any kind ever do things that may appear hateful toward this country?


You have asked a number of question that have absolutely nothing to do with the situation.

quote:

Maybe they thought the size and placement of the flag was threatening?


Makes no sense.

quote:

I can't really explain someone else's thought process.


Look. We have a reasonable explanation. You are clinging to a totally unreasonable explanation. Now I will be the first to admit that sometimes the unreasonable thing is in fact the case, but those situation are the miracles.

You have a complex that displays an american flag. You state that they allow displays of patriotism. The guy in question says that the apartment complex said he had to take the flag down because it was scaring muslims. The apartment complex says no. The display of the flag did not meet the strict rules of the complex. The complex does not want the complex to look sloppy and cheap when trying t attract new renters. They said he could display it if he simply followed the rules that are in place.

Which statement do you think takes a tremendous leap of faith and defies logic? Oh maybe the one Tran said.

Posted by GRTiger
On a roof eating alligator pie
Member since Dec 2008
63225 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:41 am to
Both Tran and the complex ownership could be telling the truth, FYI to everyone.

And what's funny is it doesn't matter at all. If the lease agreement states what he did was prohibited, he's in the wrong. If it doesn't he has a claim (I won't say the apartment is automatically wrong since they do have some latitude even if not in the lease).
Posted by thetempleowl
dallas, tx
Member since Jul 2008
14850 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:44 am to
quote:

The statement from the apartment complex does add something else to the story


What does it add? Sense? The truth? Logic? A sound explanation to a ridiculous story?

Posted by Volvagia
Fort Worth
Member since Mar 2006
51916 posts
Posted on 6/20/14 at 10:44 am to
quote:

Of course you have the right to voice your opinion. You also have the right to not sign a lease with a complex that has such a policy and sign a lease with a competing complex who's policies are more to your liking.


On a tangential topic, a lot of leases are bullshite and demand things that legally they can't demand, and use very general and overly restrictive language that complexes selectively enforce.

first pageprev pagePage 5 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram