rmalarz wrote:
I didn't express anything to infer that they weren't Muslims. I did express that it appears the violence is perpetrated by one particular sect of that religion. One might be thought of, by others, as ignorant if one wanted to collectively label all Muslims as being in favor of violence.
--Bob
Well, being a smart ass doesnt make you any smarter, Bob.
It is pretty clear to an open-minded analysis of today that the Muslim world is not really coming out against what you are trying to describe as a little, meddlesome Muslim offshoot. As such, their silence can rightly be seen as support, especially when one sees the amount of physical and financial support many of the major Muslim empires are offering these meddlesome sects.
So, the question becomes "Has anyone stated here that EVERY Muslim is in favor of violence"?
The answer is clearly no, they haven't, as every is a big word. However, given both the silence AND the support, it is entirely NOT ignorant, but a valid analysis, to say that the radical Islamist terrorists are, indeed, in favor of violence and that large portions of the entire Muslim religion sympathize with them.
Oh, global polling supports this en masse, as does many of the established laws of Muslim countries, such as the 10 that have laws of punishment by death for being gay, as an example.
canonuser644 wrote:
You forgot to mention how many people have been k**led by Christians in the same time period,tally them up then tell me who is prone to violence.
No contest........c*******m leads everyone with 94million deaths in the 20th century. As far as your insinuation, I am really only interested in what can harm me now. I don't give a rat's ass about the Middle Ages, etc..
All part of the Obama interview for the next job!
I really do not want to hear my top cop talking about fighting ANY crime, especially radical Islamist terrorism, with peace, love and understanding!
Bazbo wrote:
I previously stipulated that it happens from time to time. But anecdotes do not overturn the massive amount of data to the contrary...unless ideology is ore important to you than data.
What massive amount of contrary data? The opinions and theories of a magazine writer and other progressive i***ts?
Massive data would be, say, hundreds of examples of good guys with guns fumbling the gun, shooting themselves and others, etc. your stance is i***tic.
Wellhiem wrote:
Has a bad guy with a gun, ever been stopped by a good untrained guy with a gun.
A couple of years ago in Fla. a high guy broke into a home. The lady of the house, not very well trained, had a pistol and fired in the guy 5 times, hitting all five. The guy got out the door than dropped. And, yes, there are many stories like this each year so Slate is trying to perpetuate the myth of good guys with guns not existing.
rmalarz wrote:
Terry, I agree with your premise here, but the overall lumping of all these acts of terror under the term Muslim might be a tad misleading. If one does some research one will find that a good deal of the acts considered terrorist acts were perpetrated by followers of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Those folks, although lumped in with all Muslims, tend to be the ones more prone to terror and violence.
--Bob
.....yet Muslim they are!
Soba,
Everything is relative. Stone is one of the world's great horse's asses.
richard-sports wrote:
I m a Jew who does not like the present Israeli government at all.
The settlements keep expanding and as long as they do there will never be peace. So we share something about Israel I would guess.
I am no fan of Hillary. But when you look at Trump, a con man, schemer, ego maniac, womanizer, misogynist, a cruel man who belittles the handicapped and belittles prisoners of war, how can any human being with any feeling for humanity want that thing to be President?
And I am in favor of border controls but think about this - if the American Mussolini deported 11 million i*****l a***ns who would be doing all those jobs that they are now doing? And do not say Americans because Americans did not want to take those jobs. But not to worry he has about a 10% chance to win, and I am hoping to get to Vegas later this year and placing my money on Hillary.
Heading to New England in a few weeks,,, any of my buddies up there?
I m a Jew who does not like the present Israeli go... (
show quote)
Hilary......one of the few people that manages to be a mysogynist AND a misandrist!
Talk about con men, Hilary has managed to lie and c***t her entire adult life, she treats women as less than men, she has been obedient to her philandering, overbearing husband, yet the crazy progressives still idolize her as a modern women of strength, certitude, etc.
As for your alleged thoughts in Israel, what was your stance on the at least two opps the Muslims had for peace (direct offers from Israel) that were outright turned down by the Muslim side of the equation?
skylane5sp wrote:
Just a quick question...
On what or whom did you focus your infantile obsession before Trump?
WTF should he be buying service and goods from? China, like Hilary?????
kd7eir wrote:
Medical SCIENCE has determined when a fetus becomes viable on it's own. I know that SCIENCE is a four-letter word to conservatives, but you should try it sometime - it really does make the world easier to comprehend.
Since a******n is A LEGAL PROCEDURE in the USA, aborting a fetus is not murder, though some states may have placed ARBITRARY RESTRICTIONS upon when it may be performed. K*****g the pregnant mother, resulting in the death of the fetus, is not A LEGAL PROCEDURE in the USA, thus it's perfectly logical to charge TWO COUNTS of murder in such circumstances.
This entire thread is pure bulls**t, as one could carry its premise to the absurd length that executing a condemned prisoner is murder, therefore the prison officials that performed the execution should be tried for murder.
Absurd premises are strictly the domain of the ignorant, for an educated person would be fully capable of reasoning out the thought process, and therefore would not post such an absurd premises to begin with.
Again, SCIENCE - try it, you just mike like it!
Further, I do not believe one bit that conservatives are "pro life" and REALLY give a damn about this subject, because they CONSTANTLY v**e to take away food, healthcare, education, housing, safety - you know, the NECESSITIES OF LIFE from people. I would RESPECT CONSERVATIVES on this subject if they would simply ADMIT that what they are is ANTI-CHOICE.
Medical SCIENCE has determined when a fetus become... (
show quote)
Your thread lacks logic, bucko. The point behind legalized a******n is that the fetus is not a human, thus can't be murder.
rmalarz wrote:
I just read a news story, http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/nation/2016/06/20/pregnant-teachers-body-found-after-alleged-school-affair/86133638/ , wherein the perpetrator of the murder is being charged with murdering this female teacher and murdering her unborn baby.
Now, if he had just caused her to have an a******n, that would have k**led just the unborn baby, but no charges of murder would have been levied.
It seems to me that this is a contradiction, or tailoring phraseology such that one can get away with murder, as long as one k**ls only the unborn child.
No, I'm not wanting to start an argument for or against a******n. I'm just confused as to when k*****g someone is or isn't murder.
--Bob
I just read a news story, http://www.azcentral.com... (
show quote)
You have just hit the progressive Hypocrisy Oath! NY uses this often.
richard-sports wrote:
Rac,
Just read some of the posts from Ken, Idaho, SBW and the other h**ers on here.
They would never denigrate Jews in a public forum but anti-Semites usually don't blast their feelings that openly.
These people are openly against Muslims, Latinos, black, gays and any L**T people. You think they would segregate Jews from their h**e?
If you think that then you are deluding yourself.
You want to be a principled conservative, go right ahead. I would respect you.
But these thugs here are anti-Semites, I would bet on that.
They are silent about their anti-Semitism but make no mistake about it, they are anti-Semites.
As 47602 said, these are bigoted old white men, longing for the past that will never be. It was a d********g h**e filled past filled with KKK, segregation, George Wallace, Father Coughlin and others of that ilk.
That is what these h**ers would like America to be again.
These h**ers here have never done a mitzvah in their entire lives. Don't be allied with them. They are not your friend.
Rac, br Just read some of the posts from Ken, Idah... (
show quote)
As expected, you could not answer rac's question, just throw out unfounded insults based on your own r****m, biases, and closed little intolerant mind.
dennis2146 wrote:
He is talking assault weapons which are fully automatic or otherwise known as machine guns. The firearms in question today by Liberals are SEMI AUTOMATIC which are NOT machine guns. How many times do you Liberals have to be told that? Much of the problem regarding firearms today is that people, especially reporters, have no idea what they are talking about. They confuse clips with magazines, semi auto rifles with machine guns, firearms that simply are different looking to tried and true semi automatic firearms that have been used lawfully by American sportsmen and children since the early 1900's.
Machine guns have been heavily regulated since 1934. Now only a few states allow their possession and to buy a machine gun takes a few months of waiting and a hefty tax payment on the sale. In reality machine guns, what are really assault rifles, have not been used in a crime in recent history that I know of. There was an owner of a machine gun, an AR-15, who successfully used it to ward of multiple attackers a few years ago.
Please get your facts straight before just point out inaccuracies.
Dennis
He is talking assault weapons which are fully auto... (
show quote)
Remember the nutcase liberal mantra from Carville.......if you repeat it 100x, it becomes the t***h!
dljen wrote:
You can have a musket. Your post is why the GOP is the enabler of these shootings. Their suggestion to standing up to shootings is arming everyone. Totally stupid idea.
This comment of yours is asinine, Donna. If you want to assign blame for the asshole moves of a fanatical Islamic terrorist, look no further than Hilary and Obama, as their failed Middle East policy has made the world more dangerous for a decade.
However, to say the GOP enabled see fanatical terrorist attacks because of the current gun laws, than it really does show your Complete ignorance of facts, your intolerant, closed progressive mind, and your mastering of the week's talking points.