possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Links to popular or interesting stories in the news.

Please post links rather than copies of stories due to honoring copyright rules.

Moderators: mpallett, bakerjw, renegade, Hush

User avatar
TROOPER
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 7441
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:24 pm
Location: Augusta, Georgia

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by TROOPER »

CanOfWhooppass wrote:
TROOPER wrote:That's not a voice of reason, that's a voice of abject ignorance. Just because there's two people saying at the same time doesn't make it more true, it just means there's more abject ignorance being spread.
If your so sure I'm the ignorant one, why don't you put a pole asking if your right on the money, making a reasonable argument or radical not worth arguing with? The fact that people give up trying to reason with you dosnt make you right.
The truth is often unpopular.

Fortunately, the truth doesn't care.

Asking people if they THINK you're wrong is absurd, you're wrong because you are incorrect, not because enough people share a differing viewpoint.

The fact that I can't adequately educate you to sufficiently argue with you doesn't make me wrong, it just makes you ignorant.

But that's cool... F--k it, right? Dylann Roof was a gun-owner. Dylann Roof was bad. Ipso Facto, ALL gun-owners are bad.

You don't make even the shred of effort to differentiate between dramatically different religions, then wonder why I'm calling you ignorant? Is that so? Is that really so?

The original premise that I put forth is that religion - as a whole - isn't the problem. You disagree with this. You're wrong. You can disagree with a mathematical concept too, that doesn't make you correct. You can ask others' opinion on a mathematical concept, and that has nothing to do with the answer.

It isn't even that you're ignorant - which you are - it's that your ability to think rationally on this topic is so vigorously absent that it can't be anything other than willful.

What is religion? At its core it is just another form of government. It's a code of behavior which sets forth a system of actions and consequences. The fact that the consequences - good or bad - aren't tendered until after death is utterly irrelevant, because the fruits of that religion for society are the behaviors of its members here and now.

Examine analogous examples of your claim: democracy = constitutional republic = socialism = communism = dictator... because they're governments, and all government is the same.

The media does that to us all the damn time. I'm not surprised by this, because for one, I've found that leftists tend to be both dumber, in general... and agenda-driven, in particular. They gloss over the difference between me, as a gun-owner, versus Omar Mateen.

I usually expect better from this board, but you have disappointed, and continue to do so. It isn't even the degree to which you're wrong, it's the method by which you got there, and the additional methods you propose to defend that position.

A "pole"? What the hell would a poll prove? It isn't an opinion question.

A_Canadian.... ick set a trap for you, then you walked in to it. He probably should have explained that after the fact, but maybe he didn't because it could've come across as gloating, or maybe he just assumed you'd see it. He gives you more credit than you deserve, just like I give CanofWhoopass too much credit by assuming that he wouldn't turn around and over-simplify-and-pigeon-hole disparate groups of people after being on the receiving end of it from liberal Democrats.

--- ETA ---
"... all extremists are the same" Jesus.

What's an "Amish Extremist"? Someone who takes the Amish system of beliefs and values TOO far? So then what does that mean? He'd have NO contact with secular society? He'd eschew 'technology' from an earlier point? Perhaps no iron?

... and you think THAT is the same as a Muslim Extremist?

And what is a "radical"? Google says it is a synonym for "extreme". What is an "extreme" Christian? Someone who 'turns-the-other-cheek' to such a fault that under no circumstances would they defend themselves or their loved ones?

Compare that to a Muslim Extremist: visiting Imam to Orlando says that gays must die. This was TWO WEEKS before the shooting. You think this is an unrelated event? That Imam is a HEAD-OF-RELIGION for Islam.. the equivalent of a Bishop or a Cardinal. You don't see Bishops and Cardinals saying to kill gays. They say "love the sinner, hate the sin". They say that judgment comes in the afterlife... and we're not supposed to kill. But contrast that with Islam... Nope. Totally different. In Islam, if you die while killing infidels, you get virgins.

Which of those is compatible with a civilized society?

"All the same", you say. Go turn yourself in, Dylann Roof, because if they're all the same, then so are you.

And just to be clear: no where in here have I made a case that God is real or not. I have also quite bluntly agreed that not all - or even most - Muslims are bad. I have also been very clear when I said that Christianity isn't the end-all-be-all, or the moral best. My stance is simple: first, not all religions are the same. Religions can be - and often are - beneficial to society. Islam is not a good religion.

Three simple statements. Plenty of rational thought and well-articulated words to defend it.

Here's a thing which may seem unrelated, but it isn't. I have some co-workers that are gay... five, I think. Three males, and two females. I vastly prefer the company of the males, because while they may not be sexually interested in women, they certainly don't hate them. The two females, on the other hand, are sometimes hostile to males.

I'm reminded of that here, because in the attempts to defend atheism, there is a palpable sense of hatred for both religion in general, and Christianity in particular.


... and I still can't get passed the concept that a poll was even suggested.
a_canadian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1204
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 3:09 pm

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by a_canadian »

All the angry defensive posturing in the world doesn't change the fact - abhorrent acts of every description have been carried out in the name of Christianity. Mass murders, centuries of torture of non-believers or political/social enemies of the church, truly massive wealth extraction and power agglomeration, and let's not forget the abuse of children by the priesthood which is by now so obviously systemic (Rome continues to defend the actions of its priests, as do all other major branches of the Christian faith) as to make the Christian church a mockery of the idea of Christianity, all add up to the FACT that Christianity is a farce based not even remotely upon the tenets of Christianity's own book. Oh, so because those millions of horrible deaths and millions of diddled children are in the past, it doesn't count? The night club shooting is in the past too. The past happened. Sweeping it under a rug because your particular house of ghost worship hasn't executed anyone lately doesn't mean s--t. Religion, as a whole, is a stupid idea based primarily upon fear of dying, combined with the fundamental gullibility of our species. If a Quaker wants to grow a beard and live without modern devices, what's it to anyone? They come closer to the original idea of Christianity than just about any Christian group, so with such people I have the least argument. Hardly a proper example, is it? You haven't answered regarding the European consolidation of power in the 'holy land' I noticed... don't have an answer for that, do you? Because it's central in the Crusades. Raids by 'Muslims' back then were little different from terrorist acts by 'Muslims' today - a faith being used as an excuse for power accrual, to vent stupid anger, to abuse for the fun of it.

In case you haven't noticed, the shooter in this case has been reported by his ex-wife as probably bipolar and a chronic alcoholic who made a regular habit of hanging out in that club over 3 years and routinely got so drunk and abusive he was often kicked out. Is this a 'Muslim' sort of behaviour? Does it matter? Muslim extremist ideology provided a convenient platform for an angry man to vent, to lash out against his own failure to cope with his existence. Most Muslim suicide bombers are children, under 20 years old and often young teenage girls. They are 'recruited' (coerced) by various manipulators, thugs, power-grubbing crazy people, into finally having a bomb strapped to them and a cellphone wired to that for remote detonation as a backup in case they chicken out on the button. If they're even given a button. They're drones. Delivery systems. The men behind these outrages use the Muslim label because it is the most convenient means of continuing their criminal actions, because they are defended by a small minority of Muslim leaders who are repeatedly said by the vast majority to be buffoons who have no business calling themselves Muslims.

Take away the religion, take away the excuse. Whatever the religion. No more reason for a 'holy war' from either side. No more reason for the Jews to feel persecuted and deliver their 'defensive' missiles and bullets to various non-Jews at their typical 1,000:1 ratio. If we remove religion, things become slightly simpler. Acts of war are simply acts of war. No reason to bring political correctness into it. Someone bombs someone else, they've committed a crime, and everyone agrees this is a crime and whatever sanctions or direct actions may be called for are put into effect. Organise a global anti-war program which squashes every such action before it reaches the level where thousands of civilians are being gassed and blown up, whether by their own governments or pseudo-religious fanatics. Take away the special status of religion and such actors become simply criminals to be dealt with as in any policing effort. No precious holy books to worry about. No discrimination based on wealth or skin colour. Someone breaks the law, harms other people, they are put away or put down.

As for this idiot in Florida gunning down club patrons, isn't it obvious that the existing rules regarding access to powerful weapons (any sort of firearm, doesn't matter what one calls it) for the mentally ill and those with histories of violence ought to be enforced properly? The NRA acts much like a religion. It ought to be ignored, such that one day it might go away. Governments need to stop listening to the rantings of LaPierre and his ilk. Sure, gun sales are up, always go up after a mass shooting... but analysis of the overall statistics show that the majority of gun and ammunition purchases in the USA are made by those already in possession of larger than average numbers of such things, and that overall, firearm ownership on a per capita basis has been going down for decades. A vocal and politically powerful group is skewing the perception of actual behaviour of Americans.

And no, I'm not suggesting that non-crazy people ought to be prevented from owning firearms! I'm saying that something has to change in your broken culture. Enforcing basic laws would be a start. The de-glorification of the firearm in public education and mainstream media might help a bit too. Who doesn't love a good shooting scene in a movie, you say? Well... I actually prefer a bit of good acting. But then I'm just a dumb Canadian...
User avatar
TROOPER
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 7441
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:24 pm
Location: Augusta, Georgia

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by TROOPER »

a_canadian wrote:All the angry defensive posturing in the world doesn't change the fact - abhorrent acts of every description have been carried out in the name of Christianity....
And there it is.

You're like a broken record of irrational denial.

Stalin was an Atheist.
Mao Zedong was an Atheist.
Mussolini was an Atheist.

Almost in arguably THE most violent killers of human history.

Whatever extra bullshit you typed was a waste of time, slugger. The core of your argument has just been turned against you.

And this is EXACTLY what I'm talking about: the opposition can't put together a coherent argument. You're going to cherry-pick to prove your point? Allow me to do the exact same thing, only to much greater effect.

Beat that trump card. Stalin. 20,000,000.

Lucky for me, my stance was never built on something as abjectly stupid as "atheists kill more/less than religious people"... which seems to be your best parroted defense. You keep repeating it. AND... you can't get over the concept that I'm not making a pro-Christian stance. You're like those gay women that hate men, except that you hate Christianity. That hatred has taken first, second, and third place in all of what you're saying here.

Can you read English? Are you in Quebec?

THIS ISN'T A PRO-CHRISTIAN STANCE.

--- ETA ---

Goddamn, you are a fucking moron.
a_canadian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1204
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 3:09 pm

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by a_canadian »

Shouting ad hominem abuse as loudly and as often as you can doesn't change the fact that you ignore my points. Including the fact that I not once suggested, even remotely, that atheists kill less than religious zealots. Had to reach way, way up your butt for that one. Hitler was a vegetarian. Does that make vegetarians suspect? Or Hitler a bad person? I was arguing for the removal of special privileges for religions, nothing more. Yours is the pro-Christian position, seeking relevance.
User avatar
TROOPER
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 7441
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:24 pm
Location: Augusta, Georgia

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by TROOPER »

a_canadian wrote:Shouting ad hominem abuse as loudly and as often as you can doesn't change the fact that you ignore my points. Including the fact that I not once suggested, even remotely, that atheists kill less than religious zealots. Had to reach way, way up your butt for that one. Hitler was a vegetarian. Does that make vegetarians suspect? Or Hitler a bad person? I was arguing for the removal of special privileges for religions, nothing more. Yours is the pro-Christian position, seeking relevance.
It isn't "ad hominem", that would indicate personal attack in lieu of argument.

No, you get called a fucking moron in addition to having your ass handed to you by simply using your own argument.

Do you need evidence that you're a fucking moron?
Hitler was a vegetarian. Does that make vegetarians suspect? Or Hitler a bad person?
You just showed how a type of person could do a bad thing, and then mockingly ask if that means that ALL people like that should be suspect.

... you mean like when a religious person does a bad thing, should all religious people be suspect?

This is me, again, using your arguments to destroy you. I do this easily, because... wait for it... you're a fucking moron.

You OPEN with this diatribe of
All the angry defensive posturing in the world doesn't change the fact - abhorrent acts of every description have been carried out in the name of Christianity....
But when I point out that even MORE abhorrent acts have been carried out by self-professed atheists... suddenly that was not your point.

Again, do you actually wonder why I refer to you as a fucking moron?

Then you cap your monologue with this:
Yours is the pro-Christian position, seeking relevance.
No, really, do you wonder why I refer to you as a 'fucking moron'?

What is this? Did I type this?
Can you read English? Are you in Quebec?

THIS ISN'T A PRO-CHRISTIAN STANCE.
That was a mocking question, but now I wonder: can you read English?

It's obvious to people dumber than you (not many, but there are some) that you hate Christianity, and you're going to force whatever I say into a pro-Christian stance so that you can take swipes at your favorite villain.

But no, really, just how fucking moronic are you?
User avatar
TROOPER
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 7441
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:24 pm
Location: Augusta, Georgia

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by TROOPER »

It would be untrue to say that I won't return to this thread. I will. But verbally beating on you has lost its fun since it really isn't a challenge, a_canadian. Every point you try to make is so obnoxiously half-assed that it requires only the basest effort to refute it. Not to mention that the rabbit-hole of venting you've engaged in has skewed so far off topic that it has become asinine to even address.

But responding to you more? Why? What's in it for me? "internet points" for continually out-witting you? What's the cash value of those?

No reason.

Anyone else want to take a stab at the fundamental premises being put forth that:
1 - religion is just a form of government
2 - that religion, like government, comes in different forms...
3 - and like government, that some of these religions can be beneficial, benign, or outright harmful?

Does anyone else want to take a stab at claiming that all religions are the same (a falsehood) and that all are equally bad (another falsehood)?

I'm willing to entertain efforts in that direction. Please bring actual cohesive thoughts to the table, and not just scarcely contained hatred for Jews, or Muslims, or Christians, or Eskimos. Appeals to popularity... ? Those also need not apply.
a_canadian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1204
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 3:09 pm

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by a_canadian »

I think you could safely dispose of the 'scarcely' and probably the 'contained' as they're not really pertinent. But 'hatred' is a bit much. Try 'life it too short for such trivialities' to get a bit closer. And how about 'I've been sick almost to the point of vomiting in public for over 40 years that the majority of humans seem so stupid as to find it necessary to cling to a moronic belief in a superior being, a deity, to get them through their miserable existences' for getting even closer to the truth of my position. Religions of EVERY stripe deprive us of so much potential. And yes, sure, at times they also inspire, if tangentially, but I'd argue that humans are creative in spite of religion, not because of it.

Moronic? Says the guy who claims the rational high ground, while deepening his commitment to ad hominem irrationality. Says the guy who keeps arguing against all Muslims as belonging to an inherently and unilaterally evil organization, while simultaneously laying claim, somehow, to a non-advocate stance on Christianity. A Christian mind-slave, no more. Voting for Trump, of course. Trump, a man so deeply corrupted, so deeply fetishistic in his own self-worship that the average American just can't help but see himself mirrored gloriously in that haggard visage and jump on the bandwagon just because it's there.

Yeah, Mateen was all about the Muslim faith. Gotta ban the friggin' Muslims. They're all a bunch of ter'rists. GW Bush lives on in spades. Holy hell, this decent into madness sure is gonna be fun...
Fulmen
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:36 am

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by Fulmen »

TROOPER wrote:What is an "extreme" Christian? Someone who 'turns-the-other-cheek' to such a fault that under no circumstances would they defend themselves or their loved ones?
Yup, that's it. No radical Christians has ever shot gays or bombed an abortion clinic.
Compare that to a Muslim Extremist: visiting Imam to Orlando says that gays must die.
Spot on again, no Christian ministers has ever attacked gays.
User avatar
CanOfWhooppass
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 482
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by CanOfWhooppass »

My heart goes out to the families and friends of the victims. Tragic.

Should of said that a long time ago.
It's not a silencer, it's a can of whoopass!
User avatar
TROOPER
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 7441
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:24 pm
Location: Augusta, Georgia

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by TROOPER »

Fulmen wrote:
TROOPER wrote:What is an "extreme" Christian? Someone who 'turns-the-other-cheek' to such a fault that under no circumstances would they defend themselves or their loved ones?
Yup, that's it. No radical Christians has ever shot gays or bombed an abortion clinic.
Compare that to a Muslim Extremist: visiting Imam to Orlando says that gays must die.
Spot on again, no Christian ministers has ever attacked gays.
The heads of mainstream Christianity are saying to attack gays? No. No they are not.
The heads of mainstream Islam are saying to attack gays? Yes. Yes they are.

You're using anecdotal evidence to make a point that doesn't exist. Systemically, these are two vastly different institutions.

And no, a "Christian" that attacks a gay isn't a Christian, because he isn't employing the mainstream tenants of Christianity in carrying out his actions. Whereas a Muslim that attacks a gay is doing precisely what the heads of that religion, and its holy book, are saying to do.

Now here's a thought: I'm going to use your 'logic' on you.

Omar Mateen, Dylann Roof, and Cho were all gun-owners. They used their legally purchased firearms to maliciously and illegally murder and wound. You are a legal gun-owner. Therefore, according to your 'logic', you are no different than Omar Mateen, Dylann Roof, and Cho.

This is what leftists do in pursuit of their agenda. They ignore rational thought and logical errors in pursuit of their endgame, and to hell with the methods of getting there.

This is what you are doing in pursuit of your agenda. You are ignoring rational thought and logical errors in pursuit of your endgame, and to hell with the methods of getting there.

----------
I should have been more clear: does any rational, sane, logical person want to take a crack at refuting the three basic premises that I put forth? Fulmen has demonstrated an inability to do so, which is sad all by itself, but made much sadder by the fact that having been on the receiving end of it from gun-grabbing leftists, he hasn't learned a thing from it except how to ape irrational hatred.

There's no help for you.

You're lost by choice.
a_canadian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1204
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 3:09 pm

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by a_canadian »

The Christian holy book says:
Leviticus 20:13 - If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.

Jude 1:7 - Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Leviticus 18:22 - Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.
Just a few of the many examples of the Christian book's intolerance. You were saying? Oh, so the leaders don't advocate such acts... well that's just silly. One doesn't have to try very hard to find all manner of quotes from popes and leaders of other Christian sects denouncing homosexuals, with remarks such as 'the destruction of our very nature's being common in the last century, and direct calls to violence in earlier times.
Fulmen
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:36 am

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by Fulmen »

TROOPER wrote:The heads of mainstream Christianity are saying to attack gays? No. No they are not.
Perhaps not, but you can't deny that the Christians has opposed gay (and most other) rights quite vigorously.
The heads of mainstream Islam are saying to attack gays? Yes. Yes they are.
Are they? The problem with your argument is that you try to reduce the faith of billions to a single uniform set of beliefs and actions.
And no, a "Christian" that attacks a gay isn't a Christian
This is the basis of the "No true Scotsman"-argument (please look it up). The term "Christian" or "Muslim" is used by people with so different beliefs that they could be from different planets. Unless some official organ trademarks the terms and come up with a single definition it basically means whatever the individual wants it to mean.

Now, if you ask me which of the two religions are worst I would answer Islam. But that argument is akin to discussing which excrement smells the least foul, to me they are both smelly turds.
I'm not asking anybody to make excuses for Islam, but I would like to see Christianity judged by the same standards.
a_canadian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1204
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 3:09 pm

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by a_canadian »

While not by the same standards, if you look around in the global Muslim community you will find that Christianity's history and even current activities are indeed judged in similar terms to how the Muslim faith and people are judged by self-styled Christians. Of course neither has any inherent value, except insofar as they can provide common ground for like-minded people to meet and coordinate healthy activities in their communities. But people do that anyway. And without the baggage of religion, including all the additional expenses of bureaucracy etc. Religion is politics is money is crime. Over-simplification, sure, but it stands sufficiently true to suggest doing away with all. Of course money itself has become the single most successful religion of all... and of course anyone daring to suggest as much will be ridiculed by those who benefit the most from it.
johndoe3
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2710
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 3:02 am
Location: N. Colorado

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by johndoe3 »

money is crime. Over-simplification, sure, but it stands sufficiently true to suggest doing away with all. Of course money itself has become the single most successful religion of all... and of course anyone daring to suggest as much will be ridiculed by those who benefit the most from it.
Now you've said something important. No money is not crime or a crime or an evil; it is a neutral material means of facilitating trade; versus the unwieldy alternative of barter where price discovery is difficult. Money facilitates normal trade because in barter you have to find someone who has the goods you want, and they have to want what you have. Money is a means of increasing trade and for storing wealth.

The crux of the matter is that throughout history, an oligarchy in every country has sought power and money for control purposes over the masses. Power and money are the root desires, and the oligarchy (under all forms of government) have used patriotic nationalistic feelings and religion to control the masses and get them to do what they want--fight their wars for them and enrich the oligarchy. The oligarchy owns the media and politicians, and gets laws passed for their own benefit, while convincing the masses to want their unwise laws (populism and majoritarianism as tools). Gun control is the current oligarchy desire for the USA, as well as global warming as a new religion.

Notice that with Islam, those in political control use the religion to convince naive young people to murder for the faith. At the same time, the older ones in control don't kill themselves, their desire is for power and money.

In Venezuela, the masses have been stripped of money, jobs and now food. Meanwhile, the oligarchy (socialist) accumulated billions and live the lavish life--like Chavez stealing over $4 billion$$ which his daughter inherited.

Power and money
You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time...and those are pretty good odds.
Brett Maverick, gambler on TV (also used by Progressive leaders everywhere)
a_canadian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1204
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 3:09 pm

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by a_canadian »

Funny how such counter-arguments usually focus on governments, corrupt and otherwise, while usually omitting those with real financial power and control - the dynasties old and new who mould government actions to suit their own interests. Lobbyists? Hardly. Try puppet masters. Money provides the means for those in power to accrue ever more power and control. Invented by those in power to increase the efficiency of removal of real wealth from the masses 'beneath' them. A trend towards returning to village-scale commerce, then eventually to a trust-based system wherein individuals and groups produce what is needed and wanted because that is what they desire to do; is this not a more mature, rational approach to running a society's productivity? The profit motive has proven itself incredibly efficient in terms of the amassing of vast fortunes and power bases, inspiring corruption, feeding human greed. If we educate ourselves toward the abolishment of the mechanisms of wealth accumulation all will profit in a real sense, producing what they can and wish to produce, contributing to the whole, and consuming reasonably, evolving society towards comfort without absurd excesses.

Only anarchist theory demonstrates the path towards such a mature culture. Any society which depends upon powerful leaders is one which dooms itself to failure, largely owing to the failings of ego as a tool for responsible management. Look to Trump's history of criminal activity and his narcissistic braggadocio for a current textbook case of just how far wrong capitalism can take us. Responsibility? The man doesn't know the meaning of the word. He can't even keep his head on straight around firearms issues, waffling whichever way the wind blows in the name of getting absolute power.
User avatar
ick
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 4616
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 2:17 pm
Location: Johnstown, PA

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by ick »

-----
Ick
User avatar
whiterussian1974
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2857
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: On 8th line of eye chart.

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by whiterussian1974 »

CanOfWhooppass wrote:Radical Islam = Radical Christians = Radical Jews = Radical anybody

How is this hate based crime any different than when it's a Christian doing God's work by burning down a gay bar with people in it or shooting up an abortion clinic?
Radical Islam = those who say that others are allowed to live.
Moderate Islam = "Capture, Convert or Kill." These are the 3 options available to non-Muslims under the Quran and Sharia.

How is hate different from 1 group to another? Hate = hate. No one is defending burning down gay bars or Criminal Discharge of a Firearm in "Murder Mills."
Now, 'Use of Deadly Force in Defense of 3rd Person' is another issue. True, babies don't receive Cert of Live Birth until the Physician files the paperwork.
Are you suggesting that the Lawful Process under Aktion-T4 and Auschwitz gas chambers were ...what? Somehow ethical b/c they were lawful? Are babies somehow "Life undeserving of life?"
CanOfWhooppass wrote:The non radical Muslims are at the forefront of this battle working with the FBI, NSA and others.
Do you mean those Terrorist Orgs like CAIR (Council on American–Islamic Relations) that the FBI must request permission from b/f they can investigate Terrorists in this country?
https://seniorcitizenspublicsquare.com/category/fbi/
Obama’s Snooping Excludes Mosques, Missed Boston Bombers
Posted on June 18, 2013

Homeland Insecurity: The White House assures that tracking our every phone call and keystroke is to stop terrorists, and yet it won’t snoop in mosques, where the terrorists are.

That’s right, the government’s sweeping surveillance of our most private communications excludes the jihad factories where homegrown terrorists are radicalized.

Since October 2011, mosques have been off-limits to FBI agents. No more surveillance or undercover string operations without high-level approval from a special oversight body at the Justice Department dubbed the Sensitive Operations Review Committee.

Who makes up this body, and how do they decide requests? Nobody knows; the names of the chairman, members and staff are kept secret.

We do know the panel was set up under pressure from Islamist groups who complained about FBI stings at mosques. Just months before the panel’s formation, the Council on American-Islamic Relations teamed up with the ACLU to sue the FBI for allegedly violating the civil rights of Muslims in Los Angeles by hiring an undercover agent to infiltrate and monitor mosques there.
This DoJ "Muslims are OFF-LIMITS" Policy for Terror Investigations continues to this day according to FBI and CIA Directors during Sworn Congressional Testimony.

Interestingly, I can't seem to find the links in my search engines. Hmmm?
Yet I heard the audio. And it was covered by Mark Levin, et al on the radio.
The Darkest Corners of Hell are reserved for those who remain Neutral!-Dante
The Death of One is a Tragedy, a million only a statistic.-Stalin
silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=135314
User avatar
whiterussian1974
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2857
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: On 8th line of eye chart.

Re: possibly largest mass shooting at Orlando nightclub

Post by whiterussian1974 »

Thank you for posting this ick. Now we know (from the webcast audio) that Democrats and Leftist-Statist Progressives viewed Hitler as a 'Moderate' for his passage of the Nuremberg Laws. Should FDR only have declared War on the 'Radical' Waffen-SS and supported the 'Moderate' Gestapo/Wehrmacht/Deathcamp Guards? :shock:

I was working down from the post where I left off reading. Only after I posted my reply did I see and click your link. :)
It should be mandatory listening. "I actually think, that someone in an orange jumpsuit, about to be beheaded, would complain about Islamophobia."-Sam Harris
Muckan42 wrote: 20 hours ago
A radical muslim wants to cut your head off, a moderate muslim wants a radical muslim wants to cut your head off.
Not quite correct Muckan. The "Radical" wants to allow us to live. The "Moderate" wants us beheaded. :(
I posted the Surah a few weeks ago. "Kill them wherever you find them"-Quran (2:191-193)
Qur'an wrote:"Kill them wherever you find them. Expel them from where they drove you away. Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] are worse than killing. Do not do battle with them near the sacred house of worship (Makkah), unless it is they who engage you in battle there. If they fight you there, then slay them (there). That is the due punishment for the disbelievers."

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority"
Quran (7:80-84) - "…For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds…. And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone)" Pretty clear Orlando 'Pulse' reference. :shock:

And: http://legacy.quran.com/4/89-101
"seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper."-Q4:89

"then seize them and kill them wherever you overtake them. And those - We have made for you against them a clear authorization."-Q4:91

"Not equal are those believers remaining [at home] - other than the disabled - and the mujahideen, [who strive and fight] in the cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred the mujahideen through their wealth and their lives over those who remain [behind], by degrees. And to both Allah has promised the best [reward]. But Allah has preferred the mujahideen over those who remain [behind] with a great reward"-Q4:95

"Indeed, those whom the angels take [in death] while wronging themselves - [the angels] will say, "In what [condition] were you?" They will say, "We were oppressed in the land." The angels will say, "Was not the earth of Allah spacious [enough] for you to emigrate therein?" For those, their refuge is Hell - and evil it is as a destination."-Q4:97
---
Such messages of ... Peace?
Muslim woman displays symbol of peace.
The Darkest Corners of Hell are reserved for those who remain Neutral!-Dante
The Death of One is a Tragedy, a million only a statistic.-Stalin
silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=135314
Post Reply