AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 8, 2015 9:33:13 GMT -5
The silly European aversion to guns is the opposite extreme from our police having tanks. The police had to retreat because even the police were UNARMED! Unbelievable- French police ARE permitted to carry weapons, but many choose not to: hotair.com/archives/2015/01/07/unarmed-french-police-literally-retreated-in-the-face-of-islamist-attackers/And how'd that gun control work out for the French? The assailants had AK's and a rocket launcher. Even Howard Dean nearly tripped over the truth about gun control: Dean still couldn't bring himself to call them muslim or even islamic. But progress is progress.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 0:27:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2015 9:38:00 GMT -5
Pretty ridiculous if the French police were unarmed.
I think the U.S. may get involved at some point, in NATO an attack on one is an attack on all if it is determined to be more than just "criminal". NATO had our backs after 9/11 in Afghanistan.
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jan 8, 2015 9:51:00 GMT -5
So am I to understand that anybody that is a terrorist of some kind/cold blooded killer, mass murderer is he Muslim? Was that what you were implying Paul?
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 8, 2015 9:59:00 GMT -5
So am I to understand that anybody that is a terrorist of some kind/cold blooded killer, mass murderer is he Muslim? Was that what you were implying Paul? I'm not implying anything. The terrorists who attacked the French satirical journalism outfit yesterday were islamic radicals, and terrorists. It is true that they were "mass murderers" but there's no mistaking their motives, and this kind of talk is not helpful: Failure to identify the enemy is why we strip search grandmothers and disabled children at our airports, instead of profiling young muslim men who are more likely to be a threat than grandma and special needs 6 year olds.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,716
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jan 8, 2015 10:05:02 GMT -5
In this instance it didn't work well per the OP, but otherwise their stats look better than ours without removing lots of data.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
France 3.01 deaths per 100,000 population (2009) versus 10.30 deaths per 100,000 population (2011)
I don't really care whether they call them alleged Muslims or alleged Muslim terrorists.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jan 8, 2015 10:09:38 GMT -5
It is my understanding some of the first responders rode up on bicycles.
Maybe the police here and there actually do need armored cars sometimes.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,716
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jan 8, 2015 10:12:44 GMT -5
So am I to understand that anybody that is a terrorist of some kind/cold blooded killer, mass murderer is he Muslim? Was that what you were implying Paul? I'm not implying anything. The terrorists who attacked the French satirical journalism outfit yesterday were islamic radicals, and terrorists. It is true that they were "mass murderers" but there's no mistaking their motives, and this kind of talk is not helpful: Failure to identify the enemy is why we strip search grandmothers and disabled children at our airports, instead of profiling young muslim men who are more likely to be a threat than grandma and special needs 6 year olds. It is his choice. We strip search lots of people because not every bad thing is going to happen is from someone who identifies as Muslim. I don't call the Westboro Baptists Christian and he doesn't want to call these people Muslim.
They ignore the Muslim faith much like the Westboro Baptists do. So was the doctor who shot up the military hospital Muslim? Was the Aurora Theatre shooter Muslim? I have no idea what the Boston Bomber was, but being from Russia probably not Muslim.
ISIS speaks for themselves. Why do you have a need to hate a whole religion and most of the world's population based on the actions of a minority?
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jan 8, 2015 10:14:49 GMT -5
I read the article and I have to side with H Dean: we should not generalize this or label it as "Islamist or Muslim" or attach it to any religion. It hapened in this case that they were Muslims but that does not define the whole faith. There are sick minds in all faiths and creeds. Moreover, he is right when he is saying that ISIS is not a Muslim movement but a network of nutcases, terroristic minded bunch set out to sow discord and create disruption. Are the members of ISIS in majority Muslims? Yes but that means nothing. Hitler was a Christian, so was Stalin and yet the result of their actions was horrific. Should those that are not Christians associate the Christianity with genocide and mass murder? As far as the French police not being armed I tought that was by choice of the officers themselves and not because of the gun control laws. Five of my first cousins are cops back home-eastern Europe. SWAT team, Armory and beat cop and all of them have on themselves at least two pistols at all times. By choice! This in a country where by American standards the gun control laws are extreme.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,898
|
Post by happyhoix on Jan 8, 2015 10:16:48 GMT -5
So am I to understand that anybody that is a terrorist of some kind/cold blooded killer, mass murderer is he Muslim? Was that what you were implying Paul? I'm not implying anything. The terrorists who attacked the French satirical journalism outfit yesterday were islamic radicals, and terrorists. It is true that they were "mass murderers" but there's no mistaking their motives, and this kind of talk is not helpful: Failure to identify the enemy is why we strip search grandmothers and disabled children at our airports, instead of profiling young muslim men who are more likely to be a threat than grandma and special needs 6 year olds. These terrorists don't speak for all of Islam any more than the Westboro Baptist Church group or the Branch Davidians speak for all Christians. These are extremist religious fundamentalist terrorists, and it doesn't matter if they are fundamentalist Christians or fundamentalists Muslims or fundamentalist Jews - they carry extremist ideas that are not shared by mainstream adherants of their religion that make them dangerous to society and they should be hunted down and killed. Promoting the idea that all Muslims are terrorists violates one of the Christian tenants - love thy neighbor.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,898
|
Post by happyhoix on Jan 8, 2015 10:18:48 GMT -5
Yes, because having a well armored police force and heavily armed citizenship has kept America from having these horrible kinds of mass murders occur on our soil.
Oh - wait.....
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jan 8, 2015 10:19:28 GMT -5
I read the article and I have to side with H Dean: we should not generalize this or label it as "Islamist or Muslim" or attach it to any religion. It hapened in this case that they were Muslims but that does not define the whole faith. There are sick minds in all faiths and creeds. Moreover, he is right when he is saying that ISIS is not a Muslim movement but a network of nutcases, terroristic minded bunch set out to sow discord and create disruption. Are the members of ISIS in majority Muslims? Yes but that means nothing. Hitler was a Christian, so was Stalin and yet the result of their actions was horrific. Should those that are not Christians associate the Christianity with genocide and mass murder? As far as the French police not being armed I tought that was by choice of the officers themselves and not because of the gun control laws. Five of my first cousins are cops back home-eastern Europe. SWAT team, Armory and beat cop and all of them have on themselves at least two pistols at all times. By choice! This in a country where by American standards the gun control laws are extreme. I agree with your first sentence. It is the politics involved in religion that is the problem.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 8, 2015 10:23:13 GMT -5
Yes, because having a well armored police force and heavily armed citizenship has kept America from having these horrible kinds of mass murders occur on our soil. Oh - wait..... The trouble with an effective policy is that it is very difficult to collect data on events that are deterred or that never take place. I will point out that we've not had anything like the North Hollywood bank robbery since.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,499
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jan 8, 2015 10:25:41 GMT -5
Yeaaaaa for paul to politicize a tragedy. Is paul's type of post what you were looking for in your thread yesterday, Value Buy?
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 8, 2015 10:29:58 GMT -5
I'm not implying anything. The terrorists who attacked the French satirical journalism outfit yesterday were islamic radicals, and terrorists. It is true that they were "mass murderers" but there's no mistaking their motives, and this kind of talk is not helpful: Failure to identify the enemy is why we strip search grandmothers and disabled children at our airports, instead of profiling young muslim men who are more likely to be a threat than grandma and special needs 6 year olds. These terrorists don't speak for all of Islam any more than the Westboro Baptist Church group or the Branch Davidians speak for all Christians. These are extremist religious fundamentalist terrorists, and it doesn't matter if they are fundamentalist Christians or fundamentalists Muslims or fundamentalist Jews - they carry extremist ideas that are not shared by mainstream adherants of their religion that make them dangerous to society and they should be hunted down and killed. Promoting the idea that all Muslims are terrorists violates one of the Christian tenants - love thy neighbor. I'm not arguing that the terrorists speak for all muslims, but I will not shy away from saying that the West is dealing with the existential threat posed by radical islam; and that these are radical islamists which attacked yesterday. After 9/11 the objective was to keep the islamists busy on their home turf, and to deny them sanctuary. Now, there's an islamic caliphate- choc full of radicals- with free reign over huge swaths of territory in North Africa, and the Middle East. There is a common denominator in the majority of terrorist attacks worldwide, and it serves no purpose to pretend that people like Maj. Hassan at Fort Hood was "workplace violence" and not a radical islam-inspired terrorist attack from within the ranks of our own military- and to start keeping a closer eye on radicalization of muslims here in the US- take hints like Hassan giving a lecture basically outlining his hatred for infidels, and plans to kill people in the name of islam.
|
|
b2r
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:35:25 GMT -5
Posts: 7,257
|
Post by b2r on Jan 8, 2015 10:33:15 GMT -5
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jan 8, 2015 10:33:28 GMT -5
Yeaaaaa for paul to politicize a tragedy. Is paul's type of post what you were looking for in your thread yesterday, Value Buy? Tenn, it was my thought that this is political, not religious. Almost all "religious terrorism" if you want to call it that, is political in nature. I am really surprised you do not agree.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 8, 2015 10:35:53 GMT -5
If you really care about Muslims, and you agree with me that we don't want to see harm come to innocent people just because of their faith, then you have to agree with me that it's vitally important to identify radical islam as a threat, to confront it- enlisting the help of moderate muslims, and standing with them instead of running away from the fight.
If we don't have a robust policy of confronting radical islam, of blaming free speech / blaming the victims for radical islamist behavior, and standing by moderate muslim allies- then at some point, there will be a widespread, indiscriminate backlash against muslims.
It's already happening in France. They've ceded control of entire neighborhoods to radical muslims- this doesn't do the peaceful moderate muslims any favors- and many are radicalized because they know they can't count on the support of the French government to stand up against the radicals, and many join the 'winning team' so to speak out of self-preservation.
But you gotta ask yourself- how long can this go on with governments pretending these people don't represent islam, before a massive backlash ignites against all muslims?
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 8, 2015 10:37:59 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 8, 2015 11:01:48 GMT -5
It is my understanding some of the first responders rode up on bicycles.
Maybe the police here and there actually do need armored cars sometimes. and maybe they don't.
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jan 8, 2015 11:11:24 GMT -5
Religion has always been involved in politics. No mater of the laws and rules of separation, religion will always without fail insert itself in politics. Is just the way it is. Look no further but to debates that we currently have in our country in regards to issues such a woman's right to choose. Legaly a woman as an individual has the right to choose what to do in regards to her own body. But then we have those that oppose that claiming that is morally wrong to do certain things because God says so. And as soon as you mention Gods will, you involve religion in a legal mater but you gain support. the two cannot be separated because laws are created following a "moral compass" and morality associates with religion of all kinds.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,716
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jan 8, 2015 11:26:56 GMT -5
If you really care about Muslims, and you agree with me that we don't want to see harm come to innocent people just because of their faith, then you have to agree with me that it's vitally important to identify radical islam as a threat, to confront it- enlisting the help of moderate muslims, and standing with them instead of running away from the fight. If we don't have a robust policy of confronting radical islam, of blaming free speech / blaming the victims for radical islamist behavior, and standing by moderate muslim allies- then at some point, there will be a widespread, indiscriminate backlash against muslims. It's already happening in France. They've ceded control of entire neighborhoods to radical muslims- this doesn't do the peaceful moderate muslims any favors- and many are radicalized because they know they can't count on the support of the French government to stand up against the radicals, and many join the 'winning team' so to speak out of self-preservation. But you gotta ask yourself- how long can this go on with governments pretending these people don't represent islam, before a massive backlash ignites against all muslims? I don't get why moderate Muslims have to be enlisted in the fight. Its like saying we need moderate Christians to speak out against the Westboro Baptists because apparently we can not deal with them solely on their actions. It makes no sense to me.
Moderates already know they are radical. Getting involved won't change that any more than my posting has turned you moderate. As for igniting a backlash against all Muslims, I think your posts and people who think like you have already been stirring that pot. These people do not represent how most Muslims believe and act. Its even worse than pretending ultra Orthodox Jews are the norm, because they aren't using the cloak of religion for bad actions. If you'd stop beating the drum of Muslims are bad, Muslims are bad, and stick to ISIS is bad, the Paris shooters were murderers, perhaps the threat could be dealt with. But I think you won't be happy until we all scream 'Bad Muslim', 'Islam sucks' or something similar because of course that helps stop it all.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,499
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jan 8, 2015 11:41:34 GMT -5
It's important not to just read what is atop the video but to hear president's complete remarks in the video. Obama states, "The future does not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam". But to be credible, those who condemn that slander, must also condemn the hate we see in images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated. Or churches that are destroyed. Or the Holocaust that is denied. Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims. And Shia pilgrims. It's time to heed the words of Ghandi. "Intolerance is itself a form of violence...and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit." Is there a reason you posted that particular video, AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP? Obama is right on with his remarks. I would hope you would agree with Obama.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jan 8, 2015 12:00:23 GMT -5
So am I to understand that anybody that is a terrorist of some kind/cold blooded killer, mass murderer is he Muslim? By absolute law of nature, or statistically speaking?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 8, 2015 12:13:41 GMT -5
So am I to understand that anybody that is a terrorist of some kind/cold blooded killer, mass murderer is he Muslim? By absolute law of nature, or statistically speaking? take your pick. most acts of terrorism have been committed by non-Muslims.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 8, 2015 12:46:48 GMT -5
If you really care about Muslims, and you agree with me that we don't want to see harm come to innocent people just because of their faith, then you have to agree with me that it's vitally important to identify radical islam as a threat, to confront it- enlisting the help of moderate muslims, and standing with them instead of running away from the fight. If we don't have a robust policy of confronting radical islam, of blaming free speech / blaming the victims for radical islamist behavior, and standing by moderate muslim allies- then at some point, there will be a widespread, indiscriminate backlash against muslims. It's already happening in France. They've ceded control of entire neighborhoods to radical muslims- this doesn't do the peaceful moderate muslims any favors- and many are radicalized because they know they can't count on the support of the French government to stand up against the radicals, and many join the 'winning team' so to speak out of self-preservation. But you gotta ask yourself- how long can this go on with governments pretending these people don't represent islam, before a massive backlash ignites against all muslims? I don't get why moderate Muslims have to be enlisted in the fight. Its like saying we need moderate Christians to speak out against the Westboro Baptists because apparently we can not deal with them solely on their actions. It makes no sense to me.
Moderates already know they are radical. Getting involved won't change that any more than my posting has turned you moderate. As for igniting a backlash against all Muslims, I think your posts and people who think like you have already been stirring that pot. These people do not represent how most Muslims believe and act. Its even worse than pretending ultra Orthodox Jews are the norm, because they aren't using the cloak of religion for bad actions. If you'd stop beating the drum of Muslims are bad, Muslims are bad, and stick to ISIS is bad, the Paris shooters were murderers, perhaps the threat could be dealt with. But I think you won't be happy until we all scream 'Bad Muslim', 'Islam sucks' or something similar because of course that helps stop it all.
I think you wouldn't have to ask Christians to speak out if Westboro Baptist cult members hijacked four aircraft and murdered over 3,000 innocent Americans. And I doubt in that event that the New York Slimes would write a 1,600 word, 37 paragraph article the next day fretting over the possibility of a backlash against Christians like they did today for Europe's muslims: www.nytimes.com/2015/01/08/world/europe/paris-attack-reflects-a-dangerous-moment-for-europe.html?smid=fb-shareSimple fact is, Christians aren't mass murdering people on every continent. You can bet if they were, Christians would be the first to step up and cooperate in any opposition.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 8, 2015 12:48:21 GMT -5
take your pick. most acts of terrorism have been committed by non-Muslims. Interesting claim. I'll admit I don't know if it is true- can you support it? have i ever been unable to support a claim?
|
|
imanangel
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 8, 2014 12:18:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,042
|
Post by imanangel on Jan 8, 2015 12:48:28 GMT -5
Yes, because having a well armored police force and heavily armed citizenship has kept America from having these horrible kinds of mass murders occur on our soil. Oh - wait..... I am quoting you just so I can like your comment again! It blows my mind that people are using THIS as a Pro-gun rally cry. France has to worry about terrorist shootings. America has to worry about terrorist attacks AND Americans shooting the shit out of each other.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 8, 2015 12:50:38 GMT -5
It is my understanding some of the first responders rode up on bicycles.
Maybe the police here and there actually do need armored cars sometimes. Nah. Don't trust them. Maybe what we really need to do is, as I've said, identify those who pose a real threat, and keep a closer eye on them. We had 19 hijackers who were here illegally. Maybe instead of blanket amnesty for anyone that can manage to sneak across the border, we put the military where it belongs: on the border, not on Main Street.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jan 8, 2015 12:52:08 GMT -5
By absolute law of nature, or statistically speaking? take your pick. most acts of terrorism have been committed by non-Muslims. In the western world in this millennium, I'm pretty sure they have. And before you pull a DJ definition swap, let's nail down the definition of terrorism as the American Heritage Dictionary does: "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons."
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jan 8, 2015 12:54:01 GMT -5
Yes, because having a well armored police force and heavily armed citizenship has kept America from having these horrible kinds of mass murders occur on our soil. Oh - wait..... I am quoting you just so I can like your comment again! It blows my mind that people are using THIS as a Pro-gun rally cry. France has to worry about terrorist shootings. America has to worry about terrorist attacks AND Americans shooting the shit out of each other. To be fair, the terrorist attacks in France have the police running away rather than actually stopping the attacks, which is the point of the OP.
|
|