• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Guns Don't Kill People, The Religion Of Peace Kills People

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I'm sure you are all by now familiar with the terrorist attack on campus via another psychotic Muslim and his SUV...

So what's new? Today he made a statement that he had tried to get a gun to slaughter those infidels (over a freaking cartoon-religion of peace, my rectum), but that the gun laws here made it too difficult and complicated to get one, so he rented an SUV.

So are our gun laws good enough; did this guy just not realize you can simply walk to a street corner and buy one illegally anyway; do we need SUV control (sarcasm); is it just about reducing body count or do we give a crap about the source of the violence, or what?

On an ironic side note, the people he attacked were probably on his side anyway, being that they were students at a university. And that university leadership is still refusing to call the event a terrorist attack, preferring to treat the attack from their beloved, peaceful Muslim brother (like the ones who are currently trying to execute someone in Afghanistan for converting to Christianity) as a hit-and-run criminal instead of as an enemy (pre-9/11 mindset). Something tells me if this would have been a white Christian (or anyone) attacking dear Muslims, it would have been immediately deemed a hate crime and the college would be pushing for a federal holiday to commemorate the victims of savage bigotry everywhere.



http://gun-talk.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=002532
 
Last edited:
F

FallingPianos

"Guns Don't Kill People, The Religion Of Peace Kills People"

the religion of peace doesnt kill people, christians, jews, hindus, taoists, buddhists, atheists, etc kill people.
 

Dogger807

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 24, 2005
Messages
1,009
Reaction score
237
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
star2589 said:
"Guns Don't Kill People, The Religion Of Peace Kills People"

the religion of peace doesnt kill people, christians, jews, hindus, taoists, buddhists, atheists, etc kill people.
when was the last time you've heard of atheist serial killer? Has anyone ever killed another in the name of atheism?

Buddhist also aren't know for attacking others in the name of religion. Defending themselves in extremely competant manors yes. Attacking others in the name of religion no.

"The Shaolin teaching forbids the monk from ever being the aggressor, and instructs him to use only the minimum necessary defensive force. By becoming skilled in physical conflict the monk has a better understanding of violence and is able to use sophisticated techniques to avoid harm, ranging from simple parrying of clumsy blows to paralysing grips and knockout blows in the face of extreme violence - but always using only the amount of force needed to refuse the violence that is being offered to them."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/ethics/war/buddhism.shtml

My point is that even though you are right in the fact the individuals themselves are committing the violence, not the religions, some religions promote violence. Christians and muslims being the worst.
 
Joined
Mar 6, 2006
Messages
187
Reaction score
0
Location
Among the White US Terrorists
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'm sure you are all by now familiar with the terrorist attack on campus via another psychotic Muslim and his SUV...
The Muslim story is old and has been replaced with some guy going ape and killed 6 or more people at a party after a "zombie rave" concert with a shotgun--more than the Muslim guy took out. Please report on this and let's ban Zombie Wave after parties and the like. I'm assuming Fox News will not call this a terrorist, because he was actually mentally competent just like the muslim terrorist. LOL Go spin your crap for Fox somewhere else.

news on the Seattle event: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060326...MQDW7oF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
 

Indy

Phoenecian
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
2,089
Reaction score
408
Location
Chicago
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
aquapub said:
I'm sure you are all by now familiar with the terrorist attack on campus via another psychotic Muslim and his SUV...

So what's new? Today he made a statement that he had tried to get a gun to slaughter those infidels (over a freaking cartoon-religion of peace, my rectum), but that the gun laws here made it too difficult and complicated to get one, so he rented an SUV.

So are our gun laws good enough; did this guy just not realize you can simply walk to a street corner and buy one illegally anyway; do we need SUV control (sarcasm); is it just about reducing body count or do we give a crap about the source of the violence, or what?

On an ironic side note, the people he attacked were probably on his side anyway, being that they were students at a university. And that university leadership is still refusing to call the event a terrorist attack, preferring to treat the attack from their beloved, peaceful Muslim brother (like the ones who are currently trying to execute someone in Afghanistan for converting to Christianity) as a hit-and-run criminal instead of as an enemy (pre-9/11 mindset). Something tells me if this would have been a white Christian (or anyone) attacking dear Muslims, it would have been immediately deemed a hate crime and the college would be pushing for a federal holiday to commemorate the victims of savage bigotry everywhere.



http://gun-talk.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=002532

I never thought I would say this, but I agree with Aquapub. There, I said it. I do think that if it was a white christian male that drove over a bunch of muslims then it would undoubtedly be called a hate crime at the leaste. This double standard that we are seing lately for muslim americans is getting to be a little rediculous.
 

alphamale

Banned
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
1,120
Reaction score
0
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
aquapub said:
I'm sure you are all by now familiar with the terrorist attack on campus via another psychotic Muslim and his SUV...

So what's new? Today he made a statement that he had tried to get a gun to slaughter those infidels (over a freaking cartoon-religion of peace, my rectum), but that the gun laws here made it too difficult and complicated to get one, so he rented an SUV.

So are our gun laws good enough; did this guy just not realize you can simply walk to a street corner and buy one illegally anyway; do we need SUV control (sarcasm); is it just about reducing body count or do we give a crap about the source of the violence, or what?

On an ironic side note, the people he attacked were probably on his side anyway, being that they were students at a university. And that university leadership is still refusing to call the event a terrorist attack, preferring to treat the attack from their beloved, peaceful Muslim brother (like the ones who are currently trying to execute someone in Afghanistan for converting to Christianity) as a hit-and-run criminal instead of as an enemy (pre-9/11 mindset). Something tells me if this would have been a white Christian (or anyone) attacking dear Muslims, it would have been immediately deemed a hate crime and the college would be pushing for a federal holiday to commemorate the victims of savage bigotry everywhere.



http://gun-talk.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=002532
That sometimes people murder with guns is an insufficient reason for gun confiscation. You are right about the "hate crime" double standard - those specifications are overwhelmingly reserved for white people.
 

Polish Rob

Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
Location
Amherst, NH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Ignorance plagues this arguement. The way Musilums find foundation amongst themselves is through their religion. Honestly, if a musilum country put out a cartoon mocking christianity, or the united states, people would go nuts. You also need to factor in that there are lunitics out there, and this dude is one.

People need to CHILL out and learn not to say, oh, because he's a musilum, he's a looney.

Ignorance divides
 

Indy

Phoenecian
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
2,089
Reaction score
408
Location
Chicago
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Polish Rob said:
Ignorance plagues this arguement. The way Musilums find foundation amongst themselves is through their religion. Honestly, if a musilum country put out a cartoon mocking christianity, or the united states, people would go nuts. You also need to factor in that there are lunitics out there, and this dude is one.

People need to CHILL out and learn not to say, oh, because he's a musilum, he's a looney.

Ignorance divides
I disagree with you about the america would go nuts comment you made. It does happen all the time in the middle east. Do you really think we are never made fun of by them? Have we rioted yet? I haven't seen any.
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Polish Rob said:
Ignorance plagues this arguement. The way Musilums find foundation amongst themselves is through their religion. Honestly, if a musilum country put out a cartoon mocking christianity, or the united states, people would go nuts. You also need to factor in that there are lunitics out there, and this dude is one.

People need to CHILL out and learn not to say, oh, because he's a musilum, he's a looney.

Ignorance divides
No in Muslim countries they prefer to draw pictures of the Jews, and they don't draw pictures of Christians they execute them, take them hostage, blow them up etc etc.
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
dogger807 said:
when was the last time you've heard of atheist serial killer?
Timothy McVeigh?
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
25,384
Reaction score
10,646
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
vergiss said:
Timothy McVeigh?
He wasn't a serial killer. He was a "practical" terrorist. Damn.:roll:
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
25,384
Reaction score
10,646
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I'm just going to post the same post I post everytime someone feels the need to label a criminal a terrorist in a pathetic desperate attempt to introduce "PC" vomit into the subject.....

Aside from the individual's definition of what he considers a terrorist act....

Joint Publication (JP) 1-02, Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, defines terrorism as "the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

The question to ask yourself with each event is, "Was the shooting or "driving" an attempt to achieve a goal of a political, religious, or idealogical end?" Labeling criminal acts as a terrorist act is as irresponsible as calling that hold up man that shot the bank clerk a "terrorist." He is a simple criminal. It is beyond me why so many individuals would pervert and demean the meaning of the word "terrorist." Of course, I understand completely whgy a Muslim would do this - they are defending what is not under attack.

A terrorist doesn't not have to be Muslim - Mcveigh, the Unabomber, and Christian religious cult groups are terrorists. As is the IRA or the Stern Gang. However, one really should educate himself to the different types of terrorists (there are 2) and the severity of each (I will post the definitions of both if you would like).



...there. That will be my post every time someone feels the urge to be a slave to "political correctness" and tries to label that untrained dog that just crapped on your carpet, a terrorist.

By the way...the SUV driver fits the definition of a terrorist and he does not. His crime was more out of irrational revenge, however he did embark on a mission to serve his "god" didn't he?
 
Last edited:

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
GySgt said:
He wasn't a serial killer. He was a "practical" terrorist. Damn.:roll:
Erm, what?
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
25,384
Reaction score
10,646
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
vergiss said:
Erm, what?
You replied to the question of the existence of an athiest serial killer with Timmy.

He wasn't a serial killer. He was a Practical terrorist. Now, if he had murdered (whether destroying himself in the process or not) in the name of "God," then he would fit into the definition of an "Apocalyptic" terrorist.
 

Indy

Phoenecian
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
2,089
Reaction score
408
Location
Chicago
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
GySgt said:
I'm just going to post the same post I post everytime someone feels the need to label a criminal a terrorist in a pathetic desperate attempt to introduce "PC" vomit into the subject.....

Aside from the individual's definition of what he considers a terrorist act....

Joint Publication (JP) 1-02, Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, defines terrorism as "the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

The question to ask yourself with each event is, "Was the shooting or "driving" an attempt to achieve a goal of a political, religious, or idealogical end?" Labeling criminal acts as a terrorist act is as irresponsible as calling that hold up man that shot the bank clerk a "terrorist." He is a simple criminal. It is beyond me why so many individuals would pervert and demean the meaning of the word "terrorist." Of course, I understand completely whgy a Muslim would do this - they are defending what is not under attack.

A terrorist doesn't not have to be Muslim - Mcveigh, the Unabomber, and Christian religious cult groups are terrorists. As is the IRA or the Stern Gang. However, one really should educate himself to the different types of terrorists (there are 2) and the severity of each (I will post the definitions of both if you would like).



...there. That will be my post every time someone feels the urge to be a slave to "political correctness" and tries to label that untrained dog that just crapped on your carpet, a terrorist.

By the way...the SUV driver fits the definition of a terrorist and he does not. His crime was more out of irrational revenge, however he did embark on a mission to serve his "god" didn't he?
That's funny. I agree with your post and it reminds me of when Bush went to one of those souther mexican countries and was talking to the president on cspan. He actually tried to say the drug lords were "Narco Terrorists" I was like "WTF?? Now EVERYBODY is a terrorist??" Keep in mind this was while he was running for reellection.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
25,384
Reaction score
10,646
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
mnpollock said:
That's funny. I agree with your post and it reminds me of when Bush went to one of those souther mexican countries and was talking to the president on cspan. He actually tried to say the drug lords were "Narco Terrorists" I was like "WTF?? Now EVERYBODY is a terrorist??" Keep in mind this was while he was running for reellection.
Yeah, we're going to see it a lot in the future. People are blindly labeling what they percieve as a "terrorist" without knowing the concrete definitions put forth by our government and military long before 9/11. Unfortunately, much of our government are full of individuals who are ignorant as well.

With every new clash between our civilizations, we are still waking up to what this "War on Terror" really means. It is much more than a group of "jihadists" on a rampage. This is about a failing civilization and it's symptoms. Want to see what I'm talking about with regards to "failing" and a clash?.........

....draw a cartoon.
 
H

hipsterdufus

steen said:
Thanks for the link, that reminds me of my nominee for the most ignorant quote of all time by any president:

"No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God."
-George Bush Sr.

The pidgeon crap doesn't fall too far from the tree....:roll:
 
H

hipsterdufus

GySgt said:
Yeah, we're going to see it a lot in the future. People are blindly labeling what they percieve as a "terrorist" without knowing the concrete definitions put forth by our government and military long before 9/11. Unfortunately, much of our government are full of individuals who are ignorant as well.

With every new clash between our civilizations, we are still waking up to what this "War on Terror" really means. It is much more than a group of "jihadists" on a rampage. This is about a failing civilization and it's symptoms. Want to see what I'm talking about with regards to "failing" and a clash?.........

....draw a cartoon.
or try to convert to Chritianity in Afghanistan....

It's also the problem the US has with the word "war"

We have "The War on Terror"
The "War on Drugs"
The "War Against Poverty"
The "Culture Wars"
The president has "War Powers"

Terror is a state of mind, and it's meaning is unique to each individual.
i.e. I'm terrified of snakes, I'm terrified of getting old. "Terror" is not the person we're fighting- the terrorist. The word "terror" plays on our countries' fears. I would argue that the term the "war on terror" is not about stopping us from being afraid, it's about making and keeping us afraid.

Isn't that what the terrorists want?

Is it what the politicians want?

The terms "war on drugs" or the "war on poverty" are both metaphors. Real wars are wars between countries. Since the president has "war powers," it implies that ordinary protections, like following our constitution, don't have to be followed. A "war president" has extraordinary powers and the "war on terror," never ends...

How can you sign a peace treaty with terror?
 
Last edited:

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
25,384
Reaction score
10,646
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
hipsterdufus said:
or try to convert to Chritianity in Afghanistan....

Exactly. History has shown us that when people feel that their religious and philosophical integrity is being threatened, that they will withdraw into Radicalism and demand the punishment of non-believers. Our uncontrolled and unpredictable nature in the west is a threat to the mundane controlling and dogmatic tool of Islam.

The reason two very different worlds are clashing is due tp the information age. The world is made up of people who can receive information at the speed of a mouse click and people who restrict information for fear of how to process it (cartoons).

What happened to Spanish Catholicism when Europeans became alarmed at the advent of alternate paths to salvation instead of through the dogmatic controlling Roman Catholicism in the early 16th century (Not by coincidence, this was also the time of the invented mobile printing press)? What happened when 19th-century Protestantism became startled by the religion threatening Charles Darwin? What happens when Muslims convert to Christianity? What happens when someone writes a threatening book about Islam? What about a simple cartoon?

The free flow of information is what is causing the clash between civilizations and, indeed, a clash within Islam.
 

Iriemon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
GySgt said:
Exactly. History has shown us that when people feel that their religious and philosophical integrity is being threatened, that they will withdraw into Radicalism and demand the punishment of non-believers.
So let's invade and occupy one of their countries for phony reasons. That ought to mellow them out, eh?
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
25,384
Reaction score
10,646
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Iriemon said:
So let's invade and occupy one of their countries for phony reasons. That ought to mellow them out, eh?
What ever might offer them a chance to get out from under their oppressive Mullahs and dogmatic control of relgion. Since we are the target for every Radical in the region who needs a scapegoat to explain away what his own governments and religion has done to his society, we have an obligation to face it and not cower behind closed doors waiting for the next 9/11.

Just think....the weapon of choice would be a nuclear bomb were it readily available.
 

steen

Lie Detector
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
4,081
Reaction score
0
Location
Upper Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
GySgt said:
The free flow of information is what is causing the clash between civilizations and, indeed, a clash within Islam.
We see it as a clasdh with radivcals, not just those of the Islamic faith. Witness the tissy and spewed nonsense by creationists in the US when they are presented with scientific information. Same deal, except that they havent resorted to violence yet. But certainly, the pro-life movement's fringe has done so:
http://www.armyofgod.com/heroes.html
 

Indy

Phoenecian
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
2,089
Reaction score
408
Location
Chicago
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
steen said:
We see it as a clasdh with radivcals, not just those of the Islamic faith. Witness the tissy and spewed nonsense by creationists in the US when they are presented with scientific information. Same deal, except that they havent resorted to violence yet. But certainly, the pro-life movement's fringe has done so:
http://www.armyofgod.com/heroes.html
your link doesn't take us anywhere.
 

Dogger807

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 24, 2005
Messages
1,009
Reaction score
237
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
vergiss said:
Timothy McVeigh?
You know I've see this guy labeled as the christian terrorist and I've seen people label him an atheist. Let's face it, no one wants to claim him.

does anyone know of a non biased source that may show his religious preference if any?

I'm not saying he wasn't an atheist , I simple don't know.
 
Top Bottom