Christian Terrorism
Once again, a gunman has killed people for political reasons. Once again, he is described in the mainstream media using words and phrases such as: deranged, mentally disturbed, homicidal, gunman, shooter, criminal, murderer, and lone wolf. He may have been all of that, but one key descriptive word is conspicuously missing from most of the commentary: terrorist. Killing people who don't believe what you believe in order to further your political aims is, indeed, one of the definitions of terrorism. If the suspect involved had recently arrived here from Syria (or anywhere else in the Middle East, really), would the news networks be so cautious about calling him a "terrorist"? I seriously doubt it. In fact, if that were the case, he'd likely be quickly labelled an "Islamic terrorist."
There's an ongoing debate about the phrase "Islamic terrorism" (or "radical Islam" or similar phrasings), where conservatives insist that if politicians (specifically President Obama) would merely use the correct phrase to describe things, it will somehow bestow magical benefits. "Did you hear President Obama today?" the jihadists would incredulously say to each other, "He actually used the term 'radical Islamists' to describe us! We must have won the battle of ideas, so there's just no point in fighting on anymore. Here's my AK-47, I'm going back to my home village to grow olives." Although ridiculous, this is precisely what some Republicans seem to believe. Snark aside, however, they do have a valid semantic point to make when it comes to using "Islamic terrorism." Islamists who commit acts of terror in the name of religion are indeed Islamic terrorists. But to be consistent, correct terminology is needed for other acts of terror as well.
What do we do, for instance, when killers are bent on terrorizing people through their own particular interpretation of Christianity? Call for the doctor, apparently, because these people are always reported to be in a "questionable mental state." The same questioning of sanity is never done when the shooting rampage is by a Muslim, however. They're pure evil, while Christians who kill are merely mentally disturbed.
Some members of the press are even astonished when the term "domestic terrorism" is used. Here is the transcript of a telling segment of this week's Meet The Press, by way of example. Chuck Todd brought up the subject of the Colorado shootings late in the program, and tried to steer the conversation towards a discussion of Democrats and gun control. To his credit, right-wing commentator Hugh Hewitt turned the discussion in a different direction.
HUGH HEWITT: You know Chuck, you said to Mr. Trump, "Words matter when you're running for president." In 2012, a domestic terrorist, Floyd Corkins, attacked the Family Research Council because they were against same-sex marriage. It was a terrorist attack. This was another terrorist attack. Words do matter. But they can't back people away from these issues.
CHUCK TODD: Shouldn't we be describing -- It's interesting you say that. These are domestic terror attacks?
JOE MCQUAID: Absolutely.
HEWITT: Yes. Absolutely.
TODD: And we should be using that language?
EUGENE ROBINSON: Absolutely. We should be. And you're right, just like that earlier incident and this incident. They're both domestic terrorism incidents. And we need to use that word, you know. It's a scary word for a lot of people. But that's what it is. It's violence to achieve political lengths.
HEWITT: And a lot of crazy people out there are impacted by rhetoric, and so when you....
TODD: Well, that's what I'm thinking here. I'm, like, wondering. It's like, we call it this. But you're right. I mean, the mentally disturbed are the ones that are looking to create a rationalization for themselves.
MCQUAID: Well, what was the impact in the 1970s when the rate of domestic terrorism in this country was far from what it is now, much, much higher with bombings? And these were people with political ends. They weren't terror....
HEWITT: Well, the rhetoric of the SD [sic -- probably meant "SDS"] did have an impact on Weathermen. And they did kill people. And that's why rhetoric matters. But at the same time, we can't sanitize an issue. I will talk about the Planned Parenthood practices. They were selling baby parts. I will be happy to engage people. But I think we do have to recognize there are disturbed people on both ends of the spectrum who can be impacted by this language.
If you actually watch this segment, it is pretty clear that the concept of using the term "domestic terrorism" in this instance is a downright astonishing one to Chuck Todd. He's not alone -- most in the media shy away from using the term in their reporting, although there are some notable exceptions. And, again, kudos to the two conservative people on the panel for bringing it up and agreeing with each other. They may have changed the minds of two more liberal newsmen, Todd and Eugene Robinson. If they have, and if the two start using the term in their coverage, then that is a step forward.
Of course, as Hewitt points out, "domestic terrorism" is a fairly catch-all term. It encompasses the Weather Underground and other violent radicals on the Left from long ago as well as people who shoot up black churches or Black Lives Matter rallies or Planned Parenthood facilities. All it does is differentiate between domestic and international terrorism, really.
There are far more descriptive phrases available. The first division is usually into "left-wing" and "right-wing terrorism." Since terrorism is at its heart political, this is a natural point of departure. But even this easy pigeonholing is rarely used. A recent study shows that, since 9/11, there have been almost twice as many deaths from right-wing terrorism as from Islamic terrorism on American soil. Others put the number even higher ("You Are More Than 7 Times As Likely To Be Killed By A Right-Wing Extremist Than By Muslim Terrorists"). Even these stories soft-pedal their terminology, though. Here are the first two paragraphs from the New York Times reporting about that recent study:
In the 14 years since Al Qaeda carried out attacks on New York and the Pentagon, extremists have regularly executed smaller lethal assaults in the United States, explaining their motives in online manifestoes or social media rants.
But the breakdown of extremist ideologies behind those attacks may come as a surprise. Since Sept. 11, 2001, nearly twice as many people have been killed by white supremacists, antigovernment fanatics and other non-Muslim extremists than by radical Muslims: 48 have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, including the recent mass killing in Charleston, S.C., compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center.
Note that bent-over-backwards list, rather than simply using the correct phrase. The other headline uses "Right-Wing Extremist" rather than the proper label of "Right-Wing Terrorist." The Times doesn't even come close with "other non-Muslim extremists." The only time the news media allows itself to use even "domestic terrorism" is when they're reporting on someone else using the label, as if it is some wild or far-out accusation ("Pastor Calls Gunman A 'Domestic Terrorist' During Colorado Memorial").
Mainstream media outlets are squeamish about even using the label "domestic terrorist." They're extra-squeamish about informing their viewers and readers that these events are "right-wing terrorism." And one assumes they would go into a catatonic crouch before ever using the most-accurate phrase possible for some of these attacks: "Christian terrorism."
What would the news say if a bunch of Muslims -- some dressed in camouflage -- showed up outside a church with automatic rifles and signs denouncing Christianity? When Christians do the same thing to a mosque in Texas, it elicits little more than a yawn, however (take a look at some of the photos accompanying that article to see whether those worshippers should have feared for their lives).
Another breaking story happening right now is that of a man who shot a Moroccan taxi driver in Pittsburgh. His passenger started asking whether he was a "Pakistani guy" and about "the terror group ISIS," before moving on to mocking Mohammed. When the passenger was delivered to his house, he told the driver he had to get money from inside his house, and then returned with a rifle, which he used to shoot at the taxi as it sped away. The driver was shot in the back, but survived. The news report about the incident ran in today's Washington Post and even though the shooting happened on Thanksgiving night, the police are still "piecing together what happened" -- and no mention was made of an arrest. Or, of course, a motive.
If the allegations are true, this is nothing short of religious terrorism. It boils down to an act of violence over which god to worship, after all. If the shooter was Christian, then the proper name for it is "Christian terrorism." But I'd bet good money that that phrase will never be used by the media covering the story.
The conservatives who decried the Obama administration for classifying what happened at Fort Hood as "workplace violence" were correct, I should mention (in the interests of fairness). It was not workplace violence, it was Islamic terrorism. So was the Boston marathon bombing. When the perpetrator of terrorism is mainly motivated by religious views, then it is by definition religious terrorism. Naming the religion is simply being honest.
But by the same measurement, when the perpetrator of terrorism is mainly motivated by his or her own religious views -- say, about abortion -- then it is by definition Christian terrorism. All the killings of abortion clinic doctors and other employees are nothing short of Christian terrorism. All the facts are not in about the current shooting, again, to be fair. But it's already been leaked that the terrorist used some anti-abortion language after his arrest, so it's probably a safe bet that the Colorado attack was also Christian terrorism.
All terrorism is evil. All terrorists, by most definitions, are mentally deranged. It is simply not sane to want to kill those who worship or think differently than you because you think it would please your deity. Attacks on Planned Parenthood (and there have been a lot more of them than most of the mainstream media has noticed, of late) are domestic terrorism. They are also right-wing terrorism and religious terrorism. But the most-descriptive label is the one that the American media are simply never going to use (at least, if their vapors over even saying "domestic terrorism" are any indication). When Christians kill because of their religious beliefs, then it is by definition Christian terrorism -- whether the news media (or the public) wants to admit it or not.
-- Chris Weigant
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Yep, yep, yep.
Excellent post. Thanks.
Nous sommes Planed Parenthood.
Christian Terrorism
Why can't anyone here (sans Liz) say "Muslim Terrorism"??
I really need to read the ENTIRE commentary rather than comment as I go.. :D
Killing people who don't believe what you believe in order to further your political aims is, indeed, one of the definitions of terrorism.
You just HAVE to know that I was going to take exception to that, eh? :D
What "political aim" was this scumbag trying to further??
In fact, if that were the case, he'd likely be quickly labelled an "Islamic terrorist."
OK, Liz *AND* CW :D
There's an ongoing debate about the phrase "Islamic terrorism" (or "radical Islam" or similar phrasings), where conservatives insist that if politicians (specifically President Obama) would merely use the correct phrase to describe things, it will somehow bestow magical benefits.
Not at all..
But it WOULD show that Obama knows WHO the enemy is...
It would be as if FDR during WWII, when asked about the enemy, wouldn't say "Germans" or "Japanese"...
How can you fight an enemy and WIN against an enemy if you don't even know WHO the enemy is??
Snark aside, however, they do have a valid semantic point to make when it comes to using "Islamic terrorism." Islamists who commit acts of terror in the name of religion are indeed Islamic terrorists.
Yes, they do and yes they are..
I am VERY glad that you point that out, CW... Wish more had the grasp on reality to do so..
But to be consistent, correct terminology is needed for other acts of terror as well.
If christian terrorism was of the magnitude that islamic terrorism, then I would wager we WOULD see more references to "christian terrorism".
If you actually watch this segment, it is pretty clear that the concept of using the term "domestic terrorism" in this instance is a downright astonishing one to Chuck Todd. He's not alone -- most in the media shy away from using the term in their reporting, although there are some notable exceptions. And, again, kudos to the two conservative people on the panel for bringing it up and agreeing with each other. They may have changed the minds of two more liberal newsmen, Todd and Eugene Robinson. If they have, and if the two start using the term in their coverage, then that is a step forward.
Actually, it's about 10 steps backward...
Hewitt says terrorism is a "scary" word. He is right.. It IS a scary word and it SHOULD BE a scary word..
But if we start using it to describe EVERY action where people are killed, then guess what??
It no longer is a "scary" word.. It's common place...
It's like calling everything racism and everyone "racist".. Used to be calling someone a racist MEANT something. Now, being called a "racist" is almost a badge of honor..
Michale
It's like calling everything racism and everyone "racist".. Used to be calling someone a racist MEANT something. Now, being called a "racist" is almost a badge of honor..
We shouldn't make the same mistake with "common-placing" (and old word I just made up :D) the word "terrorism"...
Michale
As a mental exercise, try looking at things from a different perspective..
We mourn the 3 victims killed and demonize the psychotic asshole who killed them.. Rightly so...
But how many babies have been killed in that EXACT same building??
10?? 20?? Hundreds?? Thousands??
Where's the mourning for THOSE innocent lives snuffed out??
Where's the claims of "terrorism" for those innocent lives brutally "murdered" to further a "political" agenda??
Where's the "yep, yep, yep" in defense of THOSE innocent lives??
Food for thought, right??
Probably not.. Probably just derided with an "Oh, that's different" dismissal...
This concludes this portion of the mental exercise..
Hit the showers.. :D
Michale
If all these slutty, baby-killin' womenfolk would just stay in the kitchen like Jesus intended, then gun-totin', fetus-lovin', freedom fighters wouldn't have to live in chicken coops. They'd have jobs, double-wides, and internet porn.
Apparently, the mental exercise was too tough for some...
Blathering gibberish results... :D
Michale
Trying to pin the Colorado Shooting on the entirety of the Right Wingery, as JFC just tried to do, is no different than pinning the actions of the two TOP terrorist groups in the US (ELF and ALF) on the entirety of the Left Wingery...
If ya'all want to assume the mantle of responsibility for the actions of those two Terrorist Groups and all the Left Wingery nutjobs, then I'll do what I can to persuade the Right Wingery to assume the mantle of responsibility for all the actions of Right Wingery nutjobs..
Deal??
Blessed are the Peacemakers :D
Michale
Apparently, some Republican talking-point trolls believe that cutting and pasting their thought disorders to online comment forums amounts to "mental exercise". Desperate for attention and suffering from a severe reading comprehension issue, sputtering "look over there" deflections spew forth from the troll when its gibberish is ignored.
Lying about what I've said is unnecessary. If you want to troll the libs about the "two TOP terrorist groups in the US" (LOL!) then just do it troll.
Why can't anyone here (sans Liz) say "Muslim Terrorism"??
There you go, again, Michale ... trying to put words in my mouth and, worse still, playing into the hands of the violently deranged Islamist barbarians who want nothing more than to engender anti-Muslim sentiment throughout the West in order to promote their insane ideology that imagines a great clash of civilizations culminating in their victory and the end times.
Judging by the reaction of many of the Republican presidential candidates, the so-called Islamic State is having some success in this regard.
Apparently, some Republican talking-point trolls believe that cutting and pasting their thought disorders to online comment forums amounts to "mental exercise". Desperate for attention and suffering from a severe reading comprehension issue, sputtering "look over there" deflections spew forth from the troll when its gibberish is ignored.
Dance, my little puppet, Dance!! :D
Lying about what I've said is unnecessary. If you want to troll the libs about the "two TOP terrorist groups in the US" (LOL!) then just do it troll.
Thank you for your concession that you have no logical or rational response and must therefore resort to immature name-calling and childish personal attacks..
Your concession of my superiority is appreciated, albeit irrelevant..
Michale
AKA The Puppet Master
:D
There you go, again, Michale ...
Yep, there I go again.. Paying you a compliment. :D
Judging by the reaction of many of the Republican presidential candidates, the so-called Islamic State is having some success in this regard.
Judging from the LACK of reaction from Obama and the Democrats, the Daesch is having a BUTT LOAD of success in that regard...
"ISIS is contained"
-President Barack Obama
:^/
Michale
Liz,
Do you agree that this Colorado Springs scumbag is a "christian terrorist"??
Michale
But it WOULD show that Obama knows WHO the enemy is...
I think that misses the important point about why it is necessary to call a spade a spade.
It's not a matter of knowing who the enemy is. It's about knowing what needs to be done to isolate the enemy and cut off its oxygen supply.
In other words, President Obama and others - like the French president, for example - need to refocus when it comes to building a grand alliance against IS and realize that moderate Muslims everywhere need to be supported and have the loudest voice against the violently deranged Islamic barbarians.
And, regular citizens of the world like us need to condemn the slaughter of Muslims by the extremists in places like Beirut and Baghdad just as we condemn the Paris attacks. It's us against the violently deranged Islamic extremists and their supporters and we need to clarify that and use it to our great advantage.
I think there is a far better label for him and I'm sure you can come up with one! :)
JFC,
Lying about what I've said is unnecessary.
I would ask you to explain what you meant in plain english..
But I realize such a request would be futile because I doubt YOU even know what you meant... :D
Michale
AKA The Puppet Master
And, regular citizens of the world like us need to condemn the slaughter of Muslims by the extremists in places like Beirut and Baghdad just as we condemn the Paris attacks.
Could you give me an example of such "slaughter"??
I think there is a far better label for him and I'm sure you can come up with one! :)
'Scumbag asshole' works for me.. :D
If we elevate this guy to the level of "terrorist" it could be giving him the level of notoriety he may crave..
This is just a pathetic and mentally sick old fart who hated the world...
He could just as easily and just as likely killed a bunch of people at a Burger King because they got his burger order wrong...
He is no more "christian" than I am...
Michale
If we elevate this guy to the level of "terrorist" it could be giving him the level of notoriety he may crave..This is just a pathetic and mentally sick old fart who hated the world... He could just as easily and just as likely killed a bunch of people at a Burger King because they got his burger order wrong...He is no more "christian" than I am...
Brace yourself, Michale. In fact, you should really be sitting down ...
This is PRECISELY the thinking behind Obama's desire not to label IS as having anything to do with the Muslim faith because, that is exactly the kind of elevation that Islamist extremists want.
Having said that, I think Obama is wrong not to come up with a label for them that includes Islamist. At the same time, though, he needs to be far more publically supportive of moderate or non-extremist Muslims who are doing their part to counter the message of IS.
Of course, Muslim and Arab nations also need to do much more to counter the insane ideology of IS. And, there's part of the rub ...
Obama and Hollande and others also need to do much more to include moderate Muslims everywhere in a grand alliance against IS and constantly drive home the fact that we are most decidedly NOT in a clash of civilizations but rather in a struggle against barbarism.
Could you give me an example of such "slaughter"??
I could give you many! For example, just before the Paris attacks there were suicide bombings in Beirut and attacks in Baghdad that killed many Muslims. But, all we seem to talk about are the people who were killed in Paris. Why is that?
And, as you know, the violent Islamist extremists kill far more Muslims than non-Muslims. I understand that this is part of the ongoing Sunni-Shi'a divide which also must be addressed.
This is PRECISELY the thinking behind Obama's desire not to label IS as having anything to do with the Muslim faith because, that is exactly the kind of elevation that Islamist extremists want.
But in THAT case, the thinking is wrong. 1000% wrong..
Like I said above, it would be as if FDR labeled the Germans or the Japanese "the JV" and not worth worrying about..
Having said that, I think Obama is wrong not to come up with a label for them that includes Islamist. At the same time, though, he needs to be far more publically supportive of moderate or non-extremist Muslims who are doing their part to counter the message of IS.
No argument from me there..
A big part of why moderate Muslims don't speak up is because, in the past, moderate Muslims DID rise up.. But they were hammered down by the scumbags and the US cut them loose..
Of course, Muslim and Arab nations also need to do much more to counter the insane ideology of IS. And, there's part of the rub ...
You know how many Muslim and Arab nations are taking in Syrian refugees??
None.. Zero... Zip... Nada..
Obama and Hollande and others also need to do much more to include moderate Muslims everywhere in a grand alliance against IS and constantly drive home the fact that we are most decidedly NOT in a clash of civilizations but rather in a struggle against barbarism.
From yer er... fingers to Obama's...er... eyes.. :D
Michale
You know how many Muslim and Arab nations are taking in Syrian refugees?? None.. Zero... Zip... Nada..
You know how many Syrian refugees want to settle there? About the same. Heh.
Despite what Ben Carson thinks he knows, by the way.
You know how many Syrian refugees want to settle there? About the same. Heh.
While I get what you are saying and I agree with it :D it shouldn't be about what they "want"...
Let me put it another way..
As a cop on the beat, I came into contact with many people who were poor and hungry and they stole food...
But there is a big difference, a HUGE difference between someone stealing fruits or vegetables and someone who steals steaks and lobsters...
Wouldn't you agree??
My point being that beggars can't be choosers..
If you are a refugee you will go where you are told and you will be thankful for the safety and security being offered...
If we didn't follow those guidelines, refugees would demand to go to Hawaii or Tahiti or St Augustine or San Diego or any other paradise spot.. :D
Michale
I could give you many! For example, just before the Paris attacks there were suicide bombings in Beirut and attacks in Baghdad that killed many Muslims. But, all we seem to talk about are the people who were killed in Paris. Why is that?
For the same reason the media ignores all the black on black murders and violence domestically...
People killing their own is not any big deal in the eyes of the media...
Michale
Politicians ignore also for the same reason they ignore all the black on black violence..
It doesn't further their ideological agenda to acknowledge it..
Michale
Elizabeth (16): Well said -
And, regular citizens of the world like us need to condemn the slaughter of Muslims by the extremists in places like Beirut and Baghdad just as we condemn the Paris attacks. It's us against the violently deranged Islamic extremists and their supporters and we need to clarify that and use it to our great advantage.
Change "Islamist" to "black" or "white" or any other grouping and you'll see the problem...
You'll see why people can't "condemn" the savages and barbarians..
Because some of those savages/barbarians are fighting for the causes that the people believe in..
And the people can't understand the concept of "a terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist"....
Michale
And the people can't understand the concept of "a terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist"....
In other words, those people fervently, religiously, believe the old BS axiom, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"....
We satisfy our endless needs...
And justify our bloody deeds...
In the name of yesteryear...
And in the name of god
-THE EAGLES, The Last Resort
Or, if you prefer the Lefty version...
Go ahead and hate your neighbor
Go ahead and cheat a friend
But do it in the name of heaven
You can justify it in the end
-COVEN, One Tin Soldier
Michale
The Lord is my imaginary friend; you shall not abort.
He maketh me to shoot cops at Planned Parenthood.
He leadeth me beside the science deniers.
He restoreth my misogyny.
He leadeth me down the path of terrorism for His name's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the clinic killing innocent people, I will fear no cops: for I am a white guy.
They will not shoot me.
Thou preparest a hoax video to smite mine slutty enemies.
Thou filleth my head with bizarre fairy tales.
My Obama Derangement Syndrome runneth over.
Surely self-righteousness and hypocrisy shall define me all the days of my life and I shall wallow in the violence and hate that christianity promotes forever and ever.
Or else.
Like I said..
I would ask you to translate this gibberish..
But I doubt you even know what it means.. :D
Michale
But, by all means, puppet.. Keep dancing..
Since we seem to have lost another antagonist (BigA, you will be missed... :D) I am going to need someone to get my comment count up there..
You wouldn't have been my first choice, but yer the only one left standing.. :D
I have done more with worse.... :D
Michale
AKA The Puppet Master
Hey Chris: can you check your spam filter for Richard's last comment on Friday Talking Points...thanks!
Patience is a virtue.
Patience is a virtue.
"As you recall, patience is not one of my virtues.. Actually, I don't HAVE any virtues. But I am certain that, if I HAD any virtues, patience would not be one of them.."
-Crowley, SUPERNATURAL
:D
Michale
069
Michale
069
"Uh... huh..hu..huh... He said '69'... huh uh huh.."
-Beavis & Butthead
Heh
It's gonna be a wild ride!!! :D
Michale
070
Christianity and Islam are really just the names of two branches of a complicated organizational tree. Throughout history, the relationship between individual religious sects WITHIN both the Christian and the Islamic branches ranges from condescending tolerance to outright warfare. Neither of the Big Two have a formal governing mechanism for resolving doctrinal disputes among competing sects.
Historically, religious authorities within The Big Two have been tolerant of war and intolerant (with some notable exceptions) of terror directed at civilians.
As I see it, the unifying principle of terrorism, religious, or political, is fundamentalism: simple rules, immutable, universally applied, not subject to compromise.
Rather than trying to balance the coverage using the terms Christian VS Islamic terrorism, just apply the neutral term Religious Fundamentalist Terrorist.
TS,
Rather than trying to balance the coverage using the terms Christian VS Islamic terrorism, just apply the neutral term Religious Fundamentalist Terrorist.
That seems kinda unfair to the christian religion..
As I am fond of saying (and no one has refuted), level of civilization wise, islam is now where christianity was 500 years ago...
While it's not possible to hold islam to the same level of civilized behavior that christianity has today, it is patently unfair to reduce christianity to the lower common denominator..
In other words, if you have 500 islam massacres and 10 christian massacres, it's patently unfair to lump them all under Religious Extremism...
Michale
072
Thanks, Paula...
But, I just re-read comment #16 and noticed I made a big mistake in labeling the extremists ...
Should have said, violently deranged ISLAMIST barbarians not ISLAMIC ...
Words matter and never more so than in the discussion about how to degrade and defeat IS.
I hope the Obama administration will finally realize the mistake they are making in not calling out ISIL for who they are and what motivates them and what the US can and should be doing to build a grand alliance and comprehensive strategy that is not just largely focused on military options.
Looks like we have an Active Shooter situation in San Bernardino, CA..
From the description, it sounds like it might be a Daesch lone wolf x3 attack...
Michale
073
Wednesday’s statement didn’t carry as much emotional weight as the speech made after the Umpqua Community College shooting. Instead, the President appeared drained and disappointed. The delivery only made his message clearer: he’s tired of making political messages about mass shootings.
Good.. Maybe he will shut up and quit politicizing these tragedies...
If he doesn't have any concrete ideas beyond shiny beads and shallow flattery, then just shut the hell up...
Michale
074
I saids it befores and I'll says it agains..
When a gun walks into a crowd of it's own accord and starts shooting people of it's own volition...
Then... And ONLY then... Will anti-gun groups have a valid argument..
It's really THAT simple...
Michale
077
It's beginning to look more and more like a terrorist attack..
It's funny...
A neighbor reported seeing suspicious activity involving muslims, but didn't report it for fear of being labeled a racist..
Political Correctness has claimed 14 new victims...
Peachy... :^/
Michale
078
M - 38
"As I am fond of saying (and no one has refuted), level of civilization wise, islam is now where christianity was 500 years ago..."
Nobody has refuted it because it's just a statement that doesn't even try to make a case. I don't know about other people around here, but I'm not going to put any effort into trying to wrestle with that sort of rhetorical laziness. If you said "all Muslims are made of blue cheese" I wouldn't bother to refute that either.
Nobody has refuted it because it's just a statement that doesn't even try to make a case. I don't know about other people around here, but I'm not going to put any effort into trying to wrestle with that sort of rhetorical laziness. If you said "all Muslims are made of blue cheese" I wouldn't bother to refute that either.
So, you disagree with the conclusion that islam is today where christianity was 500 years ago?
Based on what?
I have plenty of anecdotal and direct evidence to support my conclusion..
You??
I mean, honestly..
It's not as if I am making the TOTALLY outrageous and TOTALLY unfounded conclusion that Global Warming causes wars...
Right?? :D
I mean, THAT would be UTTERLY redonkulous...
Right?? :D
Michale
081
White House officials are seeking a way to use executive authority to close the so-called gun show loophole that allows thousands of people to buy guns each year without a background check, but complicated legal issues have slowed the process.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/la-na-obama-gun-order-20151203-story.html
As it was with the Clock-Kid, the jokes on Obama.. AGAIN..
There is no "gun show loophole"... It's a myth perpetrated by the Left Wingery to impose unnecessary "Wouldn't It Be Nice" gun laws on the American people that want no part of them....
Once again, Obama is a victim of his own ignorant rhetoric... :D
Michale
083
Officials: San Bernardino shooter apparently radicalized, in touch with terror subjects
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/03/us/san-bernardino-shooting/index.html
Muslim Terrorism, anyone?? Anyone??
No???
Didna think so... :^/
Looks like I called it first and called it right...
Michale
M-45
It's not so much the "conclusion," it's the stupid premise: That there is a monolithic Christian Civilization, vs a monolithic Muslim Civilization. Nationality, ethnicity, culture and technology none of this matters, individuals go in one pot or the other, you are judged solely by the worst beans in your assigned pot. Nothing else matters. Civilization is equivalent to religion... and there are just two flavors. Your premise is a form of fundamentalism, simple rules, unchanging and universally applied, or so you would seem to be saying.
Fundamentalism was the point of my comment 37.
Your premise is a form of fundamentalism, simple rules, unchanging and universally applied, or so you would seem to be saying.
You call it "fundamentalism"....
I call it "common sense"...
Oh sure, if one resorts to the minutiae, one can pin point a difference here or there..
Probably more than one.. Several, in fact...
But if one ignores the enslavement of political ideology, if one just looks at the FACTS and employs a little common sense...
Well the conclusion is pretty clear...
Put another way...
If the actions of christianity and islam were reversed, the Left Wingery would be making the exact same point in defense of islam...
I am also constrained to point out that you did not take this sort of exception when Obama took the actions of christianity a thousand years ago and used it to justify the actions of islam in the here and now....
Obama made the EXACT point I am making right now...
But when HE did it, it didn't warrant contradiction...
Funny, iddn't it.. :D
Michale
086
If the actions of christianity and islam were reversed, the Left Wingery would be making the exact same point in defense of islam...
And don't think I don't appreciate the irony of it being ME that is defending christianity..
On the other hand...
"Only Nixon could go to China"
-Old Vulcan Proverb
:D
Michale
088
It's rather ironic...
Obama said that ISIS was "contained".. His top generals have said the exact opposite...
A day later, there was an ISIS terrorist attack in Paris...
A few days ago, Obama said there was no threat of a terrorist attack..
We now have 14 dead because of a terrorist attack in San Bernardino...
Maybe Obama should just shut the frak up... I mean, it's better to remain silent and have other think one a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt...
I'm just sayin'...
Michale
093
M-49
The value of common sense is directly proportional to the sense in the commoner.
The value of common sense is directly proportional to the sense in the commoner.
You have been hanging around JFC *WAY* too long!! :D
Michale
097
The value of common sense is directly proportional to the sense in the commoner.
I would say you are wrong, though..
The value of common sense is inversely proportional to the ideological enslavement of the person possessing the common sense...
Michale
098
In other words, PARTY UBER ALLES trumps common sens every day and twice on Sunday...
Michale
099
It's rather ironic, eh?
In the aftermath of the Paris terrorist attacks, I stated unequivocally that it's only a matter of time before the US is hit with such attacks..
But even I didn't realize how short that "matter of time" would be...
Michale
107
Looks like we have an Active Shooter situation in San Bernardino, CA..
From the description, it sounds like it might be a Daesch lone wolf x3 attack...
Michale
073
[ Permalink ] [ Wednesday, December 2nd, 2015 at 13:40 PST ]
Admit it...
Ya'all are impressed....
Michale
116