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
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.
I'm sure you are all by now familiar with the terrorist attack on campus via another psychotic Muslim and his SUV...
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
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
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
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
dogger807 said:when was the last time you've heard of atheist serial killer?
vergiss said:Timothy McVeigh?
GySgt said:He wasn't a serial killer. He was a "practical" terrorist. Damn.:roll:
vergiss said:Erm, what?
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?
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.
steen said:This might be a good time for this link:
http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/nov_2000/vic_chris.htm
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.
hipsterdufus said:or try to convert to Chritianity in Afghanistan....
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.
Iriemon said:So let's invade and occupy one of their countries for phony reasons. That ought to mellow them out, eh?
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:GySgt said:The free flow of information is what is causing the clash between civilizations and, indeed, a clash within Islam.
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
vergiss said:Timothy McVeigh?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?