More US terrorism

In the spirit of snackbar aloha, are we certain young Abdul didn't really mean, "swill the Zinfandel"?
 
Last edited:
UTChE96 said:
If only we had more knife and car control laws, this attack may have been prevented.
Click to expand...

We don't know the full details of why/how this terrorist attacked but imagine how many people would be dead if he used a gun. At this point we have 9 victims that will hopefully be able to walk away (prayers for the 1 in critical condition).
 
Seattle Husker said:
We don't know the full details of why/how this terrorist attacked but imagine how many people would be dead if he used a gun. At this point we have 9 victims that will hopefully be able to walk away (prayers for the 1 in critical condition).
Click to expand...

So it's acceptable to have 9 victims due to car and knife violence? I think we need common sense reforms.

(Tongue firmly in cheek) But it's the same logic that gun control activists use. We live in a free society that is not risk free. And I am not going to get into the Pandora's box that more gun ownership has actually made us safer.
 
Last edited:
UTChE96 said:
So it's acceptable to have 9 victims due to car and knife violence? I think we need common sense reforms.

(Tongue firmly in cheek) But it's the same logic that gun control activists use. We live in a free society that is not risk free. And I am not going to get into the Pandora's box that more gun ownership has actually made us safer.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was every acceptable to have any victims. The police officer that took out this dude is a hero.

I'm all for common sense reforms. Let's start by saying nobody of consequence wants to take all guns away.
 
Cyl8YRzXEAAqB8x.jpg
 
Tucker seems to have rehabilitated himself
I have only seen clips like this of certain interviews, never once turned his show on. Based on the clips, it looks like he is bringing in regular-folk type of liberals instead of the usual highly paid advocates who just always seem to rotate around all the other news shows.
Then Tucker gives them lots of rope .....
And I think it's working, so far .....

 
Joe Fan said:
Tucker seems to have rehabilitated himself
I have only seen clips like this of certain interviews, never once turned his show on. Based on the clips, it looks like he is bringing in regular-folk type of liberals instead of the usual highly paid advocates who just always seem to rotate around all the other news shows.
Then Tucker gives them lots of rope .....
And I think it's working, so far .....

Click to expand...

He pretty much leads them into discrediting themselves or just making themselves look flat out stupid. He has a good way of acting confused and like he doesn't really know the answer before he asks a question. I'm enjoying his show so far.
 
Hollandtx said:
I find it curious that many Americans are so quick to be "ashamed, disgusted, horrified" about the gun laws in the US, but will hold their tongue, or be called a racist Islamaphobe if they speak out against radical Muslim. Such a double standard.
Click to expand...

The vilification of gun owners is pretty silly as only a tiny fraction perpetrate violence on innocents, as is vilification of Muslims, an even smaller percentage of whom hurt innocent people.

I suspect the former happened among folks who don't know many gun owners and the latter among people who don't know many Muslims. I'm guessing a lot of media members personally know Muslims.
 
Last edited:
Holland made a distinction by qualifying "radical muslims". That is not all muslims nor is it meant to be.
I doubt a lot of media personally know radical muslims.
 
So 6721, do you think laws and public policy targeting only "irresponsible gun owners" would be hunky dory with the gun lobby? Wouldn't work in Texas.

"Radical" is not a really specific qualifier. Some of my religious brethren advocate radical Christianity and frankly, I'm all for it. Whether it is "Radical Muslim" or "Muslim" violence being decried, it's targeting a religion, setting up "us against them" and more harm than good will come from it unless your goal is religious war.
 
Crockett said:
Whether it is "Radical Muslim" or "Muslim" violence being decried, it's targeting a religion, setting up "us against them" and more harm than good will come from it unless your goal is religious war.
Click to expand...

What is the common denominator when "Radical Muslim" is applied? Those committing the act of violence are Muslim and practicing their faith in the most radical form.

They aren't simply Muslims who attack strangers for non-religious reasons, it's directly done in practice of their faith.

The "radical" aspect applies to those who take the word so literally they act to kill non-believers or support those that intend to do such.

More harm than good by defining the problem, the root motivation behind the violent acts, and attempting to root out those who advocate it?
 
I think it's at least open to question as to whether Islam is the "root cause" of violent acts. Scholars and journalists who have interviewed captured ISIS participants found them to have similar motivation to gangsters ... money, women adventure. Of terror participants in the US, even the 9-11 bombers, you find hardly any devout Muslims who lead highly religious lives. Instead you had lifelong troublemakers and adventurist folk with nothing much to lose on earth buying into the "us against them" narrative Donald Trump/Ted Cruz and his ilk work so hard to create and Barak Obama/The Bush family, work so carefully to avoid.
 
Crockett said:
I think it's at least open to question as to whether Islam is the "root cause" of violent acts
Click to expand...

Yes but couldn't we say the same for several groups in history who killed in the name of something?

I'm sure several KKK members had underlying personal issues that lead to joining up and committing violence in the name of hate. Same can be said for some Nazis.

Fact was regardless of why members were doing so, the group was causing havoc and needed to be defeated as a whole. Addressing symptoms won't cure the disease.
 
Brad Austin said:
Fact was regardless of why members were doing so, the group was causing havoc and needed to be defeated as a whole. Addressing symptoms won't cure the disease.
Click to expand...
So long as the target is a specific, identifiable group this makes sense. We can defeat ISIS and the KKK. We can't defeat "radical Islam" or "white racism."
 
Crockett said:
"radical Islam"
Click to expand...

Haven't most of these modern day attackers been emboldened by, acted on indirect instruction from, and claimed allegiance to ISIS?

I don't recall the Western World being under siege on a regular basis before their group earned legitimacy.

Cut off the head and the snake will die. With no ISIS propaganda or caliphate to attach to, lone wolves will just live lonely and depressed like before. :smile1:
 
Joe Fan said:
Cyl8YRzXEAAqB8x.jpg
Click to expand...

In the bizarre world that is the average American college, it's not surprising that this woman urges compassion for Abdul Artan.

Here's an article about two dumbass profs at Univ. of Colorado-Colorado Springs that teach that the U.S. founding fathers were terrorists.

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/29988/

Anybody sending their kid to college these days is subjecting them to a Leftist brainwashing, especially if they major in liberal arts and take courses in social justice and microaggression.
 
That's incredible Clean, unless lectures immediately following brought forth the opportunity to refute their direction. I remember being very enthused by one of my classes, way back then, where the prof would come in and give a lecture challenging everything I believed or had been taught in HS and then said "now tell me where I am wrong, if you can". And we had some of the best discussions I ever remember. I can recall these type back and forth discussions in both History classes and Philosophy. Fun times but sooooo long ago.
 
Obama's stringent vetting process seems to be lacking......

"DHS Knew OSU Attacker Was Terror Recruitment Target, Let Him Into The U.S. Anyway"
Department of Homeland Security officials knew Ohio State University attacker Abdul Razak Ali Artan was a possible recruitment target of Islamic terrorists but granted him asylum anyway, along with his mother and six of his siblings, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley revealed in a letter sent Wednesday to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.........


http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/15/d...cruitment-target-let-him-into-the-u-s-anyway/
 
Kori Ali Muhammad who killed three people in Fresno on Tuesday while shouting "Allahu Akbar" wanted to kill as many white people as possible. But cops say it wasn't terrorism, he just hates white people.

A doctor who examined him says he has "psychosis". It's California and he only killed whites. He'll probably get the O.J. treatment; probation and then become a poster boy for kids at Berkeley.
 
The AP got caught, so they're changing their story.

I remember when you heard "the AP is reporting that ...." and you knew whatever followed was gospel.
 
Crockett said:
I think it's at least open to question as to whether Islam is the "root cause" of violent acts. Scholars and journalists who have interviewed captured ISIS participants found them to have similar motivation to gangsters ... money, women adventure. Of terror participants in the US, even the 9-11 bombers, you find hardly any devout Muslims who lead highly religious lives. Instead you had lifelong troublemakers and adventurist folk with nothing much to lose on earth buying into the "us against them" narrative Donald Trump/Ted Cruz and his ilk work so hard to create and Barak Obama/The Bush family, work so carefully to avoid.
Click to expand...

It depends on if you hold "Islam" accountable for the madrassas. The madrassas are certainly not uniform but many of them do teach violence. You could go either way as to assigning blame to the religion writ large or to the leaders of these institutions. IMO the majority of mid/low level terrorists just fell into it for gang-like reasons (belonging, money, fear, etc). Those running the show are like mob bosses and simply wrap themselves in the flag of Islam to try to give their actions credibility to the wider community.

I would disagree that the "us against them" narrative is due to DT/TC or that it ever diminished due to BO/GB disclaiming a "war on Islam". Years after we had been in AFG, we still went to homes where they thought we were the Russians. Many are completely clueless about world affairs. Most don't get CNN, they hear/believe what the Imam tells them. They have their own version of FAKE news into which we have never been able to effectively inject ourselves. It really doesn't matter what the POTUS says about Islam being the enemy or not. Much of the hatred is about their socio economic status more than their religious status. Particularly the incidents that happen in EU and US by/with/thru immigrants from Muslim countries.

It's just a lot more PC to utter "Allah Akbar" than "I will kill you all because I don't have a job and my bank account is empty"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top