It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: theonenonlyone
originally posted by: Vasa Croe
originally posted by: theonenonlyone
a reply to: Vasa Croe
I see what you are trying to do there and I find that it works on people who can be easily swayed.
You basically twisted what I intended into something that fits your point of view.
Turning my statement from fanatics exist in all religions into Christians are the real victims.
Nice try.
What I am trying to do? The article is obviously trying to pull at heart strings for tens of thousands of one religion and almost scoff at the hundred of thousands of another. Sorry, but skewed reporting doesn't cut it for me. I would say that Muslims pushed so hard and so long in that country that the Christians are now finally pushing back. If nobody will do anything about the fanatics then the non-fanatics will do something about it themselves eventually. People can only take so much before snapping and when you have hundreds of thousands that have had to flee one religions persecution because they want to take over, eventually they will fight back....similar to how it is happening now.
I don't know what you intended, but my point of view has nothing to do with it. The article focused on the smaller group as if they somehow matter more than the larger group, regardless of religion. I would ask why they chose to report on the smaller group more than anything....brings agendas that much more to light.
You would be correct in than the Christians are fighting back but does that make the acts they are committing less atrocious than the acts committed by ISIS?
No, an act of brutality is no better under one religion than another.
originally posted by: DJanon
Just to make it explicitly clear here in the forums: The individuals were not carrying GoPro cameras.
It was denied twice in the press conference.
the fbi agent said this doesnt fit the fbi's definition of terrorism? what definition is that?
The FBI agent said that they have a very specific definition of terrorism. He also said that they cannot call it terrorism before they have a motive.
originally posted by: WeDemBoyz
The number of wounded has risen from 14 to 21.
14 dead, total wounded raised to 21. #SanBernardino mass shooting. Watch live briefing here: t.co...— KSLA News 12 (@KSLA) December 3, 2015
originally posted by: tonycodes
originally posted by: DJanon
Just to make it explicitly clear here in the forums: The individuals were not carrying GoPro cameras.
It was denied twice in the press conference.
the fbi agent said this doesnt fit the fbi's definition of terrorism? what definition is that?
The FBI agent said that they have a very specific definition of terrorism. He also said that they cannot call it terrorism before they have a motive.
ok so what is this specific definition?
originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: neo96
For our government it will be sugar coated as domestic violence or work related violence, terrorism is taboo.
originally posted by: tonycodes
ok so what is this specific definition?
originally posted by: IAMTAT
I DO find it curious that on one hand, the msm and the left really really want Farook to be a "nutter" who freaked out at the office and went on a spontaneous 'workplace violence' rampage; his motives completely devoid of any religious or political ideology (i.e. Radical Islamic Terrorism)...
...while, on the other hand, the msm and the left bent over backwards to portray 'Dear',..not as just some 'crazy loon in a cabin', but a Right Wing Christian militant.
During the day way before they shot the two I remember dispatch mentioned the guy's name and saying something along the lines about hearing the name last week does anyone know why they were watching him/them?
originally posted by: neoholographic
Of course this is terrorism but Obama is so worried about protecting Islam instead of protecting America.
Obama thinks Americans are so stupid that we can't sepatrate Radical Islam from all Muslims.
What does calling it terrorism get us?
originally posted by: neoholographic
Of course this is terrorism but Obama is so worried about protecting Islam instead of protecting America.
Obama thinks Americans are so stupid that we can't sepatrate Radical Islam from all Muslims.