Looks like another Islamic terrorist attack

[Bucky]

Really? You're kidding me, right?

This is coming from the guy that wants to throw all Muslims into internment camps and ban all hijabs.

Yes, I am. The word Islamic needs to be highlighted.

 

[Thoreau72]

Wait... huh... what? You thinknit is a conspiracy?

Unless the guy acted all by himself with no support, it IS a conspiracy, by definition.

 

[azgreg]

Looks like the shooter was influenced by a right wing terrorist.

Brian Tashman
‏@briantashman
Munich shooter reportedly idolized right-wing terrorist Anders Breivik and targeted foreigners. No ISIS link so media coverage will fade.

https://twitter.com/briantashman/status/756843806851424257

Munich gunman 'obsessed with mass shootings' - BBC News

'Obvious' link
Munich police chief Hubertus Andrae said there was an "obvious" link between the new attack and Friday's fifth anniversary of Breivik's attacks in Norway, when he murdered 77 people.
Mr Andrae warned the number of injured could increase if people who had fled the scene came forward.

 

[Bodi]

Unless the guy acted all by himself with no support, it IS a conspiracy, by definition.

Not an accepted definition...

 

[Blue_State]

I am skeptical about whether or not this was a "muslim" attack. German-Iranian? A witness saying he screamed allah akbar? I don't know. I am not convinced either way.

 

[Born Free]

In Germany. Details sketchy, but the money is on ISIS.

BERLIN — Germany has some of the world's strictest gun laws. But that did not stop Friday's Munich attacker — an 18-year old dual Iranian-German national — from carrying out his shooting spree.

The assailant most likely obtained his pistol illegally and did not have a license, German police officials said Saturday. That development could have worrisome implications for a country that has already exhausted most legal means to prevent such shooting sprees.

Germany has some of the world’s strictest gun laws, but illegal weapons remain a threat - The Washington Post

I thought taking away guns and amo was supposed to stop killings. That's what the left keeps telling us. Yet an 18 year old got a gun and amo and started a shooting spree.

 

[Thoreau72]

Not an accepted definition...

I talking about the definition of conspiracy as used in a court of law--planning by 2 or more persons. That is, one person acting alone does not qualify as a conspiracy.

 

[Manc Skipper]

BERLIN — Germany has some of the world's strictest gun laws. But that did not stop Friday's Munich attacker — an 18-year old dual Iranian-German national — from carrying out his shooting spree.

The assailant most likely obtained his pistol illegally and did not have a license, German police officials said Saturday. That development could have worrisome implications for a country that has already exhausted most legal means to prevent such shooting sprees.

Germany has some of the world’s strictest gun laws, but illegal weapons remain a threat - The Washington Post

I thought taking away guns and amo was supposed to stop killings. That's what the left keeps telling us. Yet an 18 year old got a gun and amo and started a shooting spree.

He was German and said so during the shooting. (his parents were Iranian)

Restrictions on gun ownership can't possibly prevent killings and nobody sensible claims it does. Gun regulation severely reduces the number of guns in circulation making them harder to get and much more expensive on the black market.

 

[Born Free]

He was German and said so during the shooting. (his parents were Iranian)

Restrictions on gun ownership can't possibly prevent killings and nobody sensible claims it does. Gun regulation severely reduces the number of guns in circulation making them harder to get and much more expensive on the black market.

Really, all I hear from liberals is that gun control will stop all the killings. Proven over and over again it's not so. Hell look at Mexico, no way you can have a gun in Mexico. But Mexico is like Chicago, and Obama even supplied guns to the criminals in Mexico. Remember Fast & Furious. Did you notice that Obama speaking about the killings in Germany, he did not say one word about gun control. Not one word. Now why was that???

Kill the 2nd and according to you it will not stop gun violence. I agree totally.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Really, all I hear from liberals is that gun control will stop all the killings. Proven over and over again it's not so. Hell look at Mexico, no way you can have a gun in Mexico. But Mexico is like Chicago, and Obama even supplied guns to the criminals in Mexico. Remember Fast & Furious. Did you notice that Obama speaking about the killings in Germany, he did not say one word about gun control. Not one word. Now why was that???

Kill the 2nd and according to you it will not stop gun violence. I agree totally.

It might be what you hear but it's not what I say. You like guns. Why not leave it there? It's a valid argument. Not a very good one, but it's probaby the best one you have. The rest is bloviation.

 

[Bodi]

I talking about the definition of conspiracy as used in a court of law--planning by 2 or more persons. That is, one person acting alone does not qualify as a conspiracy.

Your original comment makes it sound like you think that the government is in on these shootings. Is that what you meant by, "its supposed to sound like it".??

 

[Thoreau72]

Your original comment makes it sound like you think that the government is in on these shootings. Is that what you meant by, "its supposed to sound like it".??

I mean that the powers that be are in on manipulating the public perception, and have been doing it for a very long time.

 

[Born Free]

It might be what you hear but it's not what I say. You like guns. Why not leave it there? It's a valid argument. Not a very good one, but it's probaby the best one you have. The rest is bloviation.

Yes I like guns and the argument is a very good one, taking away peoples guns does not stop anything. That is a fact proven over and over and you agree with that fact. The fact that people like guns and the fact that taking way their guns does not stop anything, those are two arguments that have stood the test of time, thus the 2nd has stood the test of time. You on the other hand have no argument, thus the 2nd stands.

And try your hand at answering this:

Did you notice that Obama speaking about the killings in Germany, he did not say one word about gun control. Not one word. Now why was that???

 

[braindrain]

Your original comment makes it sound like you think that the government is in on these shootings. Is that what you meant by, "its supposed to sound like it".??

I would hope that you are not expecting a straight answer from Thoreau. Judging by his posting history it would appear he is incapable of giving one.

 

[braindrain]

I mean that the powers that be are in on manipulating the public perception, and have been doing it for a very long time.

Oh look. Exactly as I predicted. How unsurprising

 

[Bodi]

I mean that the powers that be are in on manipulating the public perception, and have been doing it for a very long time.

So killers that attack, state why they attack, etc are not really doing what they appear to be doing... it is really the government manipulating us?

 

[Bodi]

I would hope that you are not expecting a straight answer from Thoreau. Judging by his posting history it would appear he is incapable of giving one.

I am not holding my breath but I have to give every person at least one chance...

 

[Cephus]

So killers that attack, state why they attack, etc are not really doing what they appear to be doing... it is really the government manipulating us?

Because the truth doesn't matter, only the narrative, at least according to these people.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Yes I like guns and the argument is a very good one, taking away peoples guns does not stop anything. That is a fact proven over and over and you agree with that fact. The fact that people like guns and the fact that taking way their guns does not stop anything, those are two arguments that have stood the test of time, thus the 2nd has stood the test of time. You on the other hand have no argument, thus the 2nd stands.

And try your hand at answering this:

Did you notice that Obama speaking about the killings in Germany, he did not say one word about gun control. Not one word. Now why was that???

I didn't hear what he said, but I neither know nor care why he did or didn't say anything about something not germane to the situation in a different country where American sensitivities don't apply. Come to think of it, why are you introducing this irrelevance? It smacks of an unhealthy obsession, rather than a mere liking.

 

[Thoreau72]

So killers that attack, state why they attack, etc are not really doing what they appear to be doing... it is really the government manipulating us?

Hand-in-glove, government and mainstream media. A perfect example was the San Bernardino attack. Scott Pelley and CBS News quickly received testimony from a woman who was there, her testimony conflicted with the official narrative, so Scott and CBS simply ignored her testimony and swept it under the proverbial rug.

After hearing her story regarding 3 athletic men as being the shooters, the dissonant Scott said "Are you sure it was 3 males? The authorities have told us it was a man and his wife?"

There you have it sir, in a capsule. A true statement from a woman who worked at the place was completely ignored because the authorities had told CBS it was a man and his wife.

 

[Born Free]

I didn't hear what he said, but I neither know nor care why he did or didn't say anything about something not germane to the situation in a different country where American sensitivities don't apply. Come to think of it, why are you introducing this irrelevance? It smacks of an unhealthy obsession, rather than a mere liking.

:doh:doh

 

[Bodi]

Hand-in-glove, government and mainstream media. A perfect example was the San Bernardino attack. Scott Pelley and CBS News quickly received testimony from a woman who was there, her testimony conflicted with the official narrative, so Scott and CBS simply ignored her testimony and swept it under the proverbial rug.

After hearing her story regarding 3 athletic men as being the shooters, the dissonant Scott said "Are you sure it was 3 males? The authorities have told us it was a man and his wife?"

There you have it sir, in a capsule. A true statement from a woman who worked at the place was completely ignored because the authorities had told CBS it was a man and his wife.

Oh. A woman said so... yep, there you have it. It is proof positive. A conspiracy.

 

[Thoreau72]

Oh. A woman said so... yep, there you have it. It is proof positive. A conspiracy.

So you're telling me it is a sign of good police work to disregard the woman's observation and go with a story that is contradicted by the statements of 2 different eye witnesses?

By definition, what happened in SB was very much a conspiracy. Either a man and his wife did the dirty deed, or 3 athletic men dressed in military garb did the dirty deed. So the consumer has his choice of which conspiracy to believe. :lamo

 

[Bodi]

So you're telling me it is a sign of good police work to disregard the woman's observation and go with a story that is contradicted by the statements of 2 different eye witnesses?

By definition, what happened in SB was very much a conspiracy. Either a man and his wife did the dirty deed, or 3 athletic men dressed in military garb did the dirty deed. So the consumer has his choice of which conspiracy to believe. :lamo

Faulty or unreliable witness testimony is taken into account and dismissed... often. Why? Because it is inaccurate or proven incorrect. No conspiracy in the real sense of the word.

 

[Thoreau72]

Snap, like a Venus Flytrap. "Don't tell me facts that don't fit my accepted narrative". Like Mr. Pelley, CD in action. eace