San Bernardino Atrocity, an Attempt by Radical Islamists to Push for Gun Control?

I have seen a lot of people ask why would these Islamic extremists attack a place that caters to the needs of disabled children?

Apart from wanting to instill fear in people, imo this could very well be an attempt from Radical extremists to also push for gun control in America. it would serve them. Think about it. An America disarmed, that would only have LEOs and military armed would be more easily infiltrated, and attacked en mass by Islamist radicals.

Some will say that it was simply a disgruntled employee who got angry for whatever reason during the meeting, and then decided to do this. But what the police found in their apartment, the explosive devices, shows they had planned to do this for a long time, and they were making preparations to make it worse. Whatever happened during the meeting that made the radical Islamist Syed angry, and go back to his home and bring back his wife, and another Islamist extremist just made them commit this atrocious act earlier than they intended to do it. But it is obvious they had it planned for quite a while.

For what other reason would these Islamist extremists have attacked with firearms the Inland Regional Center? Yes, part of it is to instill terror as well. But we have seen left-wing politicians and media push for "more gun control in America" using tragedies like this one to disarm Americans.

Barbara Boxer Still Wants to Disarm Americans

Meanwhile left-wing politicians, and the left-wing media have their own reasons to disarm Americans, they are still playing right into part of what Islamic radicals want for America.

All the people, including the Obama administration, who want to push for gun control are doing exactly what the Islamic radicals want them to do. To disarm America, which has also been part of the plan the Obama administration has had since day one.

According to an internal memo from the National Institute of justice, gun buybacks are ineffective and too small to have an impact", and in order for their "gun control to be effective" the government needs to implement "gun registration and eventually confiscation of all firearms."

The entire document is very telling, and it also shows that an assault weapons ban would not have a large impact on gun violence.

Summary of Select Firearm Violence Prevention Strategies

Greg Ridgeway, Ph.D.
Deputy Director
National Institute of Justice
January 4, 2013

On average there are about 11,000 firearm homicides every year. While there are deaths resulting from accidental discharges and suicides, this document will focus on intentional firearm homicides. Fatalities from mass shootings (those with 4 or more victims in a particular place and time) account on average for 35 fatalities per year. Policies that address the larger firearm homicide issue will have a far greater impact even if they do not address the particular issues of mass shootings
...
Evidence:
Gun buybacks are ineffective as generally implemented. 1. The buybacks are too small to have an impact. 2. The guns turned in are at low risk of ever being used in a crime. 3. Replacement guns are easily acquired. Unless these three points are overcome, a gun buyback cannot be effective.
...
In order to have an impact, large capacity magazine regulation needs to sharply curtail their availability to include restrictions on importation, manufacture, sale, and possession. An exemption for previously owned magazines would nearly eliminate any impact. The program would need to be coupled with an extensive buyback of existing large capacity magazines. With an exemption the impact of the restrictions would only be felt when the magazines degrade or when they no longer are compatible withguns in circulation. This
would take decades to realize.
...
Universal background checks
Twitter summary:Effectiveness depends on the ability to reduce straw purchasing, requiring gun registration and an easy gun transfer process.
...
Assault weapon ban
Twitter summary: Assault weapons are not a major contributor to gun crime. The existing stock of assault weapons is large, undercutting the effectiveness of bans with exemptions.
...
Evidence: Guns are durable goods. The 1994 law exempted weapons manufactured before 1994. The exemption of pre-1994 models ensures that a large stock, estimated at 1.5 million, of existing weapons would persist. Prior to the 1994 ban, assault weapons were used in 2-8% of crimes. Therefore a complete elimination of assault weapons would not have a large impact on gun homicides.
...
Since assault weapons are not a major contributor to US gun homicide and the existing stock of guns is large, an assault weapon ban is unlikely to have an impact on gun violence. If coupled with a gun buyback and no exemptions then it could be effective.
The 1997 Australian gun buyback was massive in scale and, while it appears to have had no effect on gun homicide, Australia has had no mass shootings since the ban was put in place.
...

static.infowars.com...


A large gun buyback without exemptions = gun confiscation.

edit on 3-12-2015 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.

edit on 3-12-2015 by ElectricUniverse because: add links and excerpts.

I think, this American guy and his Saudi woman wanted to convince you of the healthcare system to wring out your last penny. Or even worse: They wanted to heat up the situation to support the global warming hoax.

But one thing is for sure: They derailed everybody from the reality of UFOs and made people think more about extremists than the reality.

I noticed a big slide down at the stocks markets today. Can't be coincidence.

This case is obscure somehow. So you got every right to speculate.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Close your eyes and imagine what a completely disarmed America would look like accounting for the ever-steady morphing of Law enforcement into the full-on militarization monster that has surely been planned.

Now, couple all that with the propaganda convincing the Kardashian crowd to give up more freedoms to ensure more "security".

But we have seen left-wing politicians and media push for "more gun control in America" using tragedies like this one to disarm Americans.

And on the other side of the coin we have the NRA and other assorted gun nuts using these tragedies to push an everyone should be armed and guns should be less regulated agenda.

Call me crazy but when mass shootings happen every few weeks maybe it does have something to do with the fact guns are everywhere, just a thought

a reply to: ElectricUniverse
Personally, I think it's the other way around. We have a system using terrorism as a convenient way to eventually disarm it's citizens. And I believe they will accomplish it at some point. But it will cost them, and us unfortunately. I've always figured when the time was right, Americans would give up their guns with a whimper, instead of a fight. And I still believe most will. But there's a small percentage of the population who aren't going to lay down so easily.

originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff
...
Call me crazy but when mass shootings happen every few weeks maybe it does have something to do with the fact guns are everywhere, just a thought

Yeah, well, maybe you should blame the Obama administration for releasing 167,000 illegal criminals, many of whom have committed thousands of crimes including homicide and even homicides with guns.

New Data Show Immigrant Gang Arrests
Disproportionately associated with the most violent Central American gangs

By Jessica Vaughan, March 27, 2015


Violent immigrant and transnational gangs such as MS-13, the Sureños, and 18th Street continue to present a significant public safety threat in many parts of the United States, according to arrest records released by ICE to the Center for Immigration Studies.

In 2013 (the most recent year available), ICE arrested significant numbers of gang members in California, Texas, Chicago, and the New York City and Washington, DC, metropolitan areas. Large concentrations also were arrested by ICE agents in Atlanta, Charlotte, and south Florida.

In addition to the large transnational gangs, smaller immigrant gangs that operate locally or regionally are a problem all over the United States in urban, suburban, and rural areas. Since 2005, ICE has arrested more than 32,200 gang members, leaders and associates. Arrests peaked in 2012, then dropped by more than 25 percent in 2013, and continued to decline in 2014.

This recent record calls into question President Obama's claim that gang members are among the highest priorities for enforcement. The administration has been severely criticized for legalizing known illegal alien gang members in the controversial Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, including Emmanuel Jesus Rangel-Hernandez, who has been arrested in North Carolina for the murder of four people.

You can see the ICE Gang Arrest fact sheet.

CIS obtained the ICE data through a Freedom of Information Act request as part of ongoing research on transnational gangs and ICE anti-gang enforcement programs. It shows that the most violent gang members arrested by ICE were disproportionately associated with the Central American gangs, including MS-13.
...

cis.org...

Many of these criminals released by the Obama administration have committed crimes, including murder with guns.









The 16 year old illegal immigrant who shot a police officer with a rifle and set the police car on fire also in 2015.

abc13.com...

Just search on youtube and you will find many more.

But it doesn't stop there.

President Obama's "Deferred Action" Program for Illegal Aliens Is Plainly Unconstitutional

By Jan Ting December 2014

...
2. Criminal Aliens Never Had It So Good

And what about criminal aliens, whose removal has supposedly so exhausted ICE resources that the government has nothing left for the arrest and removal of less dangerous illegal aliens? In fact, the FY2014 ICE statistics reveal that the number of criminal aliens removed from the interior has declined 39 percent since FY2011 and that nearly 167,000 convicted criminals who have been released by ICE are currently at large.52

Once again, the testimony of career officials belies the administration's propaganda. In his 2013 testimony to Congress, ICE officer Chris Crane explained that, contrary to the claim that "deferred action" was freeing up resources to focus on detaining criminals, DACA was being used to prevent ICE officers from inspecting and detaining jailed illegal aliens:

News has spread quickly through illegal alien populations within jails and communities that immigration agents have been instructed by the agency not to investigate illegal aliens who claim protections from immigration arrest under DACA. ICE immigration agents have been instructed to accept the illegal alien's claim as to whether or not he or she graduated or is attending high school or college or otherwise qualifies under DACA. Illegal aliens are not required to provide officers with any kind of proof such as a diploma or transcripts to prove they qualify before being released. ... As one immigration agent stated last week, "every person we encounter in the jails now claims to qualify for release under DACA."
...

cis.org...

Maybe you should blame the Obama administration for allowing more and more illegal immigrants into the U.S., even when they are criminals from known violent gangs like MS-13 into the U.S....

U.S. immigration officials released thousands of rapists, murderers, kidnappers and other violent criminals in 2013, report says

A Center for Immigration Studies report says ICE released 36,007 criminals who committed a combined total of 87,818 crimes in 2013
Of those, 17,228 convictions were for minor traffic violations and 15,635 came from DUIs
Other crimes were more serious, including 9,187 dangerous drug convictions, 426 sexual assault convictions, 303 kidnapping convictions, 193 homicide convictions, 1,317 domestic violence convictions and 1,075 aggravated assault convictions
...

www.dailymail.co.uk...

That was just in 2013.

Maybe you should blame the Obama administration for Fast and Furious, among others, and for arming Mexican drug cartels with American firearms, and then claiming that the fault is "America's gun laws"...

By Sharyl Attkisson CBS News December 7, 2011, 7:20 PM

Documents: ATF used "Fast and Furious" to make the case for gun regulations

Documents obtained by CBS News show that the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) discussed using their covert operation "Fast and Furious" to argue for controversial new rules about gun sales.
PICTURES: ATF "Gunwalking" scandal timeline

In Fast and Furious, ATF secretly encouraged gun dealers to sell to suspected traffickers for Mexican drug cartels to go after the "big fish." But ATF whistleblowers told CBS News and Congress it was a dangerous practice called "gunwalking," and it put thousands of weapons on the street. Many were used in violent crimes in Mexico. Two were found at the murder scene of a U.S. Border Patrol agent.
...
The Gun Dealers' Quandary

Several gun dealers who cooperated with ATF told CBS News and Congressional investigators they only went through with suspicious sales because ATF asked them to.

Sometimes it was against the gun dealer's own best judgment.

www.cbsnews.com...

Not only that.

Gun store owner had misgivings about ATF sting
When federal agents with Operation Fast and Furious told Andre Howard to sell weapons to illegal purchasers, he complied, but he feared someone would get hurt. Then a border agent was shot.

September 11, 2011|By Richard A. Serrano, Los Angeles Times

Reporting from Glendale and Rio Rico, Ariz. — In the fall of 2009, ATF agents installed a secret phone line and hidden cameras in a ceiling panel and wall at Andre Howard's Lone Wolf gun store. They gave him one basic instruction: Sell guns to every illegal purchaser who walks through the door.

For 15 months, Howard did as he was told. To customers with phony IDs or wads of cash he normally would have turned away, he sold pistols, rifles and semiautomatics. He was assured by the ATF that they would follow the guns, and that the surveillance would lead the agents to the violent Mexican drug cartels on the Southwest border.

When Howard heard nothing about any arrests, he questioned the agents. Keep selling, they told him. So hundreds of thousands of dollars more in weapons, including .50-caliber sniper rifles, walked out of the front door of his store in a Glendale, Ariz., strip mall.
...
Some 2,000 firearms from the Lone Wolf Trading Company store and others in southern Arizona were illegally sold under an ATF program called Fast and Furious that allowed "straw purchasers" to walk away with the weapons and turn them over to criminal traffickers. But the agency's plan to trace the guns to the cartels never worked. As the case of the two Lone Wolf AK-47s tragically illustrates, the ATF, with a limited force of agents, did not keep track of them.
...
The Mexican government maintains that an undisclosed number of Fast and Furious weapons have been found at some 170 crime scenes in their country.
...

articles.latimes.com...

BTW, it is believed that there were other operations similar to Fast and Furious in other areas of the nation that were implemented to allow the Mexican drug cartel criminals to purchase American weapons in the U.S... This was done to force legislation for gun control.

...
During an interview on Thursday evening with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, Issa said he’s concerned that ATF agents may have used tactics similar to Fast and Furious in Texas as well.

“Well we are, and there are similarities,” Issa told Cooper. “These were known straw buyers that were not intercepted or stopped, and ultimately gun walking, everyone has a different definition, but when you let weapons go from the control of a federally licensed gun dealer, to a straw purchaser, to an intermediary, and ultimately to the scene of a crime, if you don’t interdict that immediately and or follow the weapons and interdict it before you lose control, you’re gun walking and clearly appears to have happened in Texas.”
...

dailycaller.com...


The ATF, and the Obama administration tried to claim that this operation was done to capture the "big fish" in drug cartels, but the thing is as far as I know none of the weapons that have been recovered from crimes and were used under the false flag "Fast and Furious", so far none of them had tracking devices.

It is obvious the Obama administration wants to completely disarm Americans and the Obama administration would do anything, including arming criminals, and releasing criminals, among other things to increase violence, and gun violence in America.

Disarming Americans also plays in with what the Islamic radicals want.

The same thing occurred in our military bases when enlisted personnel and officers were banned from having firearms while on base, and look at how many Islamic radicals have gone into military bases with guns and killed our soldiers that were disarmed. Now they want to do the same with the rest of America.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
I have seen a lot of people ask why would these Islamic extremists attack a place that caters to the needs of disabled children?

Apart from wanting to instill fear in people, imo this could very well be an attempt from Radical extremists to also push for gun control in America. it would serve them. Think about it. An America disarmed, that would only have LEOs and military armed would be more easily infiltrated, and attacked en mass by Islamist radicals.

Some will say that it was simply a disgruntled employee who got angry for whatever reason during the meeting, and then decided to do this. But what the police found in their apartment, the explosive devices, shows they had planned to do this for a long time, and they were making preparations to make it worse. Whatever happened during the meeting that made the radical Islamist Syed angry, and go back to his home and bring back his wife, and another Islamist extremist just made them commit this atrocious act earlier than they intended to do it. But it is obvious they had it planned for quite a while.

For what other reason would these Islamist extremists have attacked with firearms the Inland Regional Center? Yes, part of it is to instill terror as well. But we have seen left-wing politicians and media push for "more gun control in America" using tragedies like this one to disarm Americans.

Barbara Boxer Still Wants to Disarm Americans

Meanwhile left-wing politicians, and the left-wing media have their own reasons to disarm Americans, they are still playing right into part of what Islamic radicals want for America.

All the people, including the Obama administration, who want to push for gun control are doing exactly what the Islamic radicals want them to do. To disarm America, which has also been part of the plan the Obama administration has had since day one.

According to an internal memo from the National Institute of justice, gun buybacks are ineffective and too small to have an impact", and in order for their "gun control to be effective" the government needs to implement "gun registration and eventually confiscation of all firearms."

The entire document is very telling, and it also shows that an assault weapons ban would not have a large impact on gun violence.

Summary of Select Firearm Violence Prevention Strategies

Greg Ridgeway, Ph.D.
Deputy Director
National Institute of Justice
January 4, 2013

On average there are about 11,000 firearm homicides every year. While there are deaths resulting from accidental discharges and suicides, this document will focus on intentional firearm homicides. Fatalities from mass shootings (those with 4 or more victims in a particular place and time) account on average for 35 fatalities per year. Policies that address the larger firearm homicide issue will have a far greater impact even if they do not address the particular issues of mass shootings
...
Evidence:
Gun buybacks are ineffective as generally implemented. 1. The buybacks are too small to have an impact. 2. The guns turned in are at low risk of ever being used in a crime. 3. Replacement guns are easily acquired. Unless these three points are overcome, a gun buyback cannot be effective.
...
In order to have an impact, large capacity magazine regulation needs to sharply curtail their availability to include restrictions on importation, manufacture, sale, and possession. An exemption for previously owned magazines would nearly eliminate any impact. The program would need to be coupled with an extensive buyback of existing large capacity magazines. With an exemption the impact of the restrictions would only be felt when the magazines degrade or when they no longer are compatible withguns in circulation. This
would take decades to realize.
...
Universal background checks
Twitter summary:Effectiveness depends on the ability to reduce straw purchasing, requiring gun registration and an easy gun transfer process.
...
Assault weapon ban
Twitter summary: Assault weapons are not a major contributor to gun crime. The existing stock of assault weapons is large, undercutting the effectiveness of bans with exemptions.
...
Evidence: Guns are durable goods. The 1994 law exempted weapons manufactured before 1994. The exemption of pre-1994 models ensures that a large stock, estimated at 1.5 million, of existing weapons would persist. Prior to the 1994 ban, assault weapons were used in 2-8% of crimes. Therefore a complete elimination of assault weapons would not have a large impact on gun homicides.
...
Since assault weapons are not a major contributor to US gun homicide and the existing stock of guns is large, an assault weapon ban is unlikely to have an impact on gun violence. If coupled with a gun buyback and no exemptions then it could be effective.
The 1997 Australian gun buyback was massive in scale and, while it appears to have had no effect on gun homicide, Australia has had no mass shootings since the ban was put in place.
...

static.infowars.com...


A large gun buyback without exemptions = gun confiscation.

You have seriously reached the far end of logic.

Yes you have.

House Republicans reject proposal
to ban gun sales to suspected terrorists

Read on below.

A proposal to ban the sale of firearms to individuals on the FBI’s terrorist watch list was defeated by House Republicans on Wednesday.

Reps. Nita Lowey (D-NY) and David Price (D-NC) offered an amendment to the Commerce, Justice, Science (CJS) Appropriations bill that would have given the U.S. Department of Justice authority to block suspected terrorists from purchasing firearms and explosives.

“Terrorists are knowingly exploiting our laws,” Lowey said, citing American-born al Qaeda spokesman Adam Gadahn.

The amendment was defeated in the House Appropriations Committee by a 19-29 vote.

“Americans expect our government to keep guns out of the hands of felons, domestic abusers, the mentally ill, and terrorists,” Lowey said in a statement. “A suspected terrorist cannot board a plane but can pass a background check to buy a gun. It is absurd that my Republican colleagues opposed our amendment to close this dangerous gap in our gun safety laws.”

Similar legislation has been proposed — and defeated — before. The National Rifle Association claimed in 2011 such proposals were “aimed primarily at law-abiding American gun owners” and “sponsored by gun control extremists.”
www.rawstory.com...

Naaaw I think Radical Islamic Terrorist ,any other terrorist and lone Nutjobs love the NRA, the Republican leadership and some Dems along with their apologist that grant them free reign, there is no script to be flipped here O.P the problem flows from one direction.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Yep. It kind of reminds you of a few comments from America's founding fathers no? Such as.

...
Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
...

www.madisonbrigade.com...

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Ben Franklin

www.brainyquote.com...

..."A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies."
...

founders.archives.gov...

James Madison, Federalist, no. 46, 320--22
29 Jan. 1788
...
The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for the common liberties and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the late successful resistance of this country against the British arms will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments of the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
...

press-pubs.uchicago.edu...

Etc, etc, etc...

a reply to: Spider879

You mean "suspected extremists" such as those claimed by the Obama administration?...

You know...These "suspected extremists"?

Napolitano is Lying to Americans About Her Department’s Rightwing Extremism Report; TMLC Files Suit
...
The Report specifically mentions the following political beliefs that law enforcement should use to determine whether someone is a “rightwing extremist”:


Opposes abortion
Opposes restrictions on firearms
Opposes lax immigration
Opposes the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship, and the expansion of social programs
Opposes continuation of free trade agreements
Opposes same-sex marriage
Has paranoia of foreign regimes
Fear of Communist regimes
Opposes one world government
Bemoans the decline of U.S. stature in the world.
Upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India
. . . and the list goes on
...
The lawsuit further claims that the Department of Homeland Security encourages law enforcement officers throughout the nation to target and report citizens to federal officials as suspicious rightwing extremists and potential terrorists because of their political beliefs.
...
...

www.thomasmore.org...

Those you mean?...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Klik the the vid.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Spider879

You mean "suspected extremists" such as those claimed by the Obama administration?...

You know...These "suspected extremists"?

Napolitano is Lying to Americans About Her Department’s Rightwing Extremism Report; TMLC Files Suit
...
The Report specifically mentions the following political beliefs that law enforcement should use to determine whether someone is a “rightwing extremist”:


Opposes abortion
Opposes restrictions on firearms
Opposes lax immigration
Opposes the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship, and the expansion of social programs
Opposes continuation of free trade agreements
Opposes same-sex marriage
Has paranoia of foreign regimes
Fear of Communist regimes
Opposes one world government
Bemoans the decline of U.S. stature in the world.
Upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India
. . . and the list goes on
...
The lawsuit further claims that the Department of Homeland Security encourages law enforcement officers throughout the nation to target and report citizens to federal officials as suspicious rightwing extremists and potential terrorists because of their political beliefs.
...
...

www.thomasmore.org...

Those you mean?...

As those that oppose him because he is a democrat, or god forbid, because of the color of his skin. Chezus man, your logic doesn't even approach the bottom of the normal scale.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I don't know if you're right or not, but I will say that I see a lot of people calling for gun control or bans on guns since yesterday.

a reply to: Spider879

Look at the Americans that the Obama administration is claiming are "rightwing extremists and possible terrorists"... It's not just Republicans, but anyone who would agree with the second amendment, or who would disagree with any policy made by Obama...

Criminals don't get armed because of America's second amendment...they get armed because they are criminals and they don't follow laws...

If disarming all people in a nation would stop mass shootings, and mass murders, you wouldn't have the Paris attack, the recent mass shooting in Australia, the fact that after the ban in Britain crimes with guns increased for years despite guns being banned, etc, etc...

Criminals do not follow laws. Laws that aim to disarm citizens will not disarm criminals...they disarmed law abidding citizens...

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

As those that oppose him because he is a democrat, or god forbid, because of the color of his skin. Chezus man, your logic doesn't even approach the bottom of the normal scale.

You should read again my statements... This has nothing to do with the color of his skin, so stop using the race card. I am also part of a minority, since i am hispanic, and have family members who are black including a cousin, an uncle, and two aunts and I get along with them like with most of my other family members.

You also seem not to understand that I am showing the other member the people that the Obama administration see as "possible extremists/possible terrorists".

Carly Fiorina stated that the ATF reported that some of the guns used by the muslim terrorists were purchased on behalf of the police department but somehow ended up in their hands.

She is reffering to an MSNBC report that apparently aired while she was waitng to do her interview on Morning Joe today.

Here is a link to the video. She says it @5:05.

www.msnbc.com...

a reply to: Spider879

The problem with the bill was that it was too open and would have given the government the right to tell who can and not own guns, no only what they deem as suspected terrorist.

Don't let the wording deceive you, its more to the bill that is been propagandized.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

As those that oppose him because he is a democrat, or god forbid, because of the color of his skin. Chezus man, your logic doesn't even approach the bottom of the normal scale.

You should read again my statements... This has nothing to do with the color of his skin, so stop using the race card. I am also part of a minority, since i am hispanic, and have family members who are black including a cousin, an uncle, and two aunts and I get along with them like with most of my other family members.

You also seem not to understand that I am showing the other member the people that the Obama administration see as "possible extremists/possible terrorists".

I am reading your stuff, it is all over the place, you are a cut and paste guru. Not much of your own comments, just talking points and such. Sets somebody like me, who actually reads stuff on edge. Dude if this is your true personality, you need to seek help, or we are going to be reading about you on the web.

Here is a youtube version of the MSNBC video where Fiorina mentions the ATF belief that the terrorist's guns were purchased on behalf of the police department. @4:50



m.youtube.com...