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.

 

Machete-wielding vandal leaves 3 pounds of bacon at Florida mosque

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 01:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: rossacus
If they haven't caught the person how do you know he wasn't Muslim? It's a safe assumption but you don't know for sure.

Don't like the machete part but bacon on the door step is funny, outside the realms of PC.

*snip*


I don't know.

And I stated in the OP how it *could* be a Muslim. Of course, that is the first excuse some people run to ("Oh, I bet it was one of their own trying to start something and blame it on others,").

Possible, but unlikely IMO.

The place was mildly vandalized, so what could be gained being self-perpetuated other than to gain attention and cry victim?

Seem more likely a non-Muslim did it, imo.


What would a Muslim gain from this when it is obvious that it will just be ignored anyway?

You do not see many people claiming this sort of thing when it is the other way round do you?


I don't know what could be gained other than crying victim.

We don't see this sort of claim when a Muslim vandalized a Church, is that what you're saying? 'Cause that doesn't happen often.

Black churchs are set on fire: oh, it's probably blacks doing it to themselves for insurance and victimhood.
A Mosque is vandalized: They probably did it themselves to gain attention and sympathy.


Likely but BS.



(post by rossacus removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 01:50 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:00 PM
link   

One More Time:



If this subject can not be discussed in a mature manner with the jokes and humor stopping NOW, this thread will be closed and left that way.

The next one to post off topic will be post banned. And the next one after that. Your post ban will not have a time limit either.

If you do not value your account, then by all means, go ahead and post another joke and watch what happens.

Do not reply to this post.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: rossacus
If they haven't caught the person how do you know he wasn't Muslim? It's a safe assumption but you don't know for sure.

Don't like the machete part but bacon on the door step is funny, outside the realms of PC.

*snip*


I don't know.

And I stated in the OP how it *could* be a Muslim. Of course, that is the first excuse some people run to ("Oh, I bet it was one of their own trying to start something and blame it on others,").

Possible, but unlikely IMO.

The place was mildly vandalized, so what could be gained being self-perpetuated other than to gain attention and cry victim?

Seem more likely a non-Muslim did it, imo.


What would a Muslim gain from this when it is obvious that it will just be ignored anyway?

You do not see many people claiming this sort of thing when it is the other way round do you?


I don't know what could be gained other than crying victim.

We don't see this sort of claim when a Muslim vandalized a Church, is that what you're saying? 'Cause that doesn't happen often.

Black churchs are set on fire: oh, it's probably blacks doing it to themselves for insurance and victimhood.
A Mosque is vandalized: They probably did it themselves to gain attention and sympathy.


Likely but BS.


I was agreeing with you.

Muslim does something: muslims did it.

Someone attack muslims: Muslims did it...

Beyond my personal comprehension.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove

originally posted by: ReadLeader
a reply to: SLAYER69

ROFL!!!

Mannnn Im getting hungry! ! ! ! !

Ok, found this

Pig meat, in all its wonderful variations—pancetta, lardo, speck, coppa, and prosciutto to name just a few—is haram (forbidden) in Islam. The Quran (6:145) states: “[Prophet], say, ‘In all that has been revealed to me, I find nothing forbidden for people to eat, except for carrion, flowing blood, pig’s meat—it is loathsome—or a sinful offering over which any name other than God’s has been invoked.’”

www.psmag.com...



Good to know cannibalism is acceptable.

Wrong. When a person dies, we're suppose to wash the body & have an immediate funeral. We're not supposed to modify or harm the body in any way. This is so serious that most Muslim denominations won't even allow autopsies or organ donations.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

It was bad joke based upon literal interpretation of the verbiage of that scripture taken out of context. Honestly surprised that post was allowed to stay and I wasn't post banned. Should have been as I regret making it.
edit on 1/4/2016 by Puppylove because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: enlightenedservant

It was bad joke based upon literal interpretation of the verbiage of that scripture taken out of context. Honestly surprised that post was allowed to stay and I wasn't post banned. Should have been as I regret making it.


Oh. Well, uh, sorry lol. I thought you were serious because of the rest of the thread.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Is there any confirmation this wasn't another Muslim false flag?



Sure. The weapon of choice was bacon.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: antar

The pig head is more disturbing to me than the use of bacon. It's like the mob threatening people with severed animal heads and could constitute an actual threat.

Bacon is more like bubba wanted to do something mean and all he knows is that Muslims don't like pork.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:45 PM
link   
The act was mean. Disrespectful.

But Christians found "piss Christ" just as mean and disrespectful. Only that was called "art".

Some didn't like the draw Mohammed contests or Charlie Hebdo pieces. They thought that as mean, disrespectful.

Is everything a "hate crime" now?



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
But Christians found "piss Christ" just as mean and disrespectful. Only that was called "art".


Was that done on a church?

Chucking bacon or a pig's head on a mosque is douchey and intolerant. Same as if they drew a swastika on a synagogue or 666 on a church.



edit on 4-1-2016 by AugustusMasonicus because: Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: DBCowboy
But Christians found "piss Christ" just as mean and disrespectful. Only that was called "art".


Was that done on a church?

Chucking bacon or a pig's head on a mosque is douchey and intolerant. Same as if they drew a swastika on a synagogue or 666 on a church.




Fine. I'll cover myself in bacon and hug a mosque, I'll just call it "Performance Art".

Crimes are crimes. But when "hate crime" gets bandied about, I find it over-used and tiresome.

imho



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Fine. I'll cover myself in bacon and hug a mosque, I'll just call it "Performance Art".

Crimes are crimes. But when "hate crime" gets bandied about, I find it over-used and tiresome.

imho


Still not the same. Where was this 'Piss Christ' art displayed? In/on a church or at a gallery?



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Gallery. I see your point.

I'll concede.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

It is an album cover I just looked it up.
A crucifix in a jar of the photographers wee wee.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Fine. I'll cover myself in bacon and hug a mosque, I'll just call it "Performance Art".

Crimes are crimes. But when "hate crime" gets bandied about, I find it over-used and tiresome.

imho


Still not the same. Where was this 'Piss Christ' art displayed? In/on a church or at a gallery?


Tax payers helped pay for it. So we had to finance our own offense.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 02:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
Tax payers helped pay for it. So we had to finance our own offense.


Link?



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I agree with the problem with a hate crime though.

How do you know someone did it out of hate.

For a lot of people, the idea that someone would actually physically cringe from touching something like raw bacon is incredibly funny, especially in today's spiritually challenged climate. It's more like a frat prank to some than an actual hate crime.

So, yeah, you'll have those folks who are actually expressing hatred, and them you'll have the ones who are doing it to sit back and guffaw over the thoughts of grown men who won't touch raw meat like squeamish girls. To them, it's a cheap laugh ... not necessarily hate.

So, revert back to vandalism which is a crime is a crime is a crime no matter why the person who did was motivated to do it.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 03:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
I agree with the problem with a hate crime though.

How do you know someone did it out of hate.


I do not believe in the 'hate crime' classification. A crime is a crime and should be punished accordingly, this is why there are variable sentences for crimes, to allow prosecutors to deal with the severity of the crime on a case by case basis.




edit on 4-1-2016 by AugustusMasonicus because: Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn




top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join