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.

 

Good ol' fashioned Christian terrorism

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2006 @ 02:12 PM
link   
www.floridatoday.com.../20060530/BREAKINGNEWS/60530006/1086

"In Waldo, people have held prayer vigils and protests aimed at an adult bookstore along U.S. 301, trying to keep "Cafe Risque" from opening its doors on time.

Those efforts have all failed, so investigators say it looks like someone has turned to what they're calling a clear act of terrorism to keep the store's owner from opening up shop."

i apologize if this is the wrong forum for this, but if we as americans resort to terrorism, then what right do we have to be in any other country preventing them from the same?

this is ridiculous, and whoever gets caught for this ought to be indicted with a charge of terrorism as well as marked a traitor. certainly no true american would resort to such foolish measures.


Mod edit: CAP title

[edit on 1-6-2006 by kinglizard]




posted on May, 31 2006 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Your making an assumption, based upon the article's mention that there were "prayer vigils and protests," in one paragraph, that the "someone" mentioned in another paragraph of the article, that allegedly committed the act of terrorism, is a Christian, no?

Till that "someone" is caught and it is confirmed that he or she is indeed a Christian, your topic title is incorrect and sensationalistic.



In Waldo, people have held prayer vigils and protests aimed at an adult bookstore along U.S. 301, trying to keep "Cafe Risque" from opening its doors on time.

Those efforts have all failed, so investigators say it looks like someone has turned to what they're calling a clear act of terrorism to keep the store's owner from opening up shop.





seekerof

[edit on 31-5-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Well Seekerof, lets get all of the suspects together, send them to Gitmo, and wait a few years before they get their trial. After all, they are terrorists are they not? Whether or not they are Christian.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 02:57 PM
link   
ok, until then. i'm fine with that. i'm fairly certain the perpetrators were christians, and that's good enough for me.

and no, this isn't a christian bashing thread. i don't really have any feelings one way or another for christians as a whole. just trying to show that the coin has two sides.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by 25cents
ok, until then. i'm fine with that. i'm fairly certain the perpetrators were christians, and that's good enough for me.

and no, this isn't a christian bashing thread. i don't really have any feelings one way or another for christians as a whole. just trying to show that the coin has two sides.


Who cares? There have always been Christian terrorists. But they don’t kill as many people right now as the Islamic ones do.

My family is in more immediate danger from Islamic terrorists than Christian terrorists. This incident does not change that one iota. I also personally know more people affected by Islamic terrorists than Christian terrorists.

Until you can post video's on a daily basis of Christians beheading people because they wore shorts or did something crazy like vote, my opinion wont chage.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Well Seekerof, lets get all of the suspects together, send them to Gitmo, and wait a few years before they get their trial. After all, they are terrorists are they not? Whether or not they are Christian.

Are you under the misperception that "all", an absolute (no room or margin for error), those being detained at Gitmo are terrorists? What about those classified as "enemy combatants" who were captured in the combat zones of Afghanistan and Iraq?





seekerof

[edit on 31-5-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 03:13 PM
link   
How about calling for the destruction of people based on their religious beliefs? What about calling for the assassination of foreign leaders based on their Christian fanaticism?


Pat Robertson
If Christian people work together, they can succeed during this decade in winning back control of the institutions that have been taken from them over the past 70 years. Expect confrontations that will be not only unpleasant but at times physically bloody.... This decade will not be for the faint of heart, but the resolute. Institutions will be plunged into wrenching change. We will be living through one of the most tumultuous periods of human history. When it is over, I am convinced God's people will emerge victorious.

and

Pat Robertson
The Constitution of the United States, for instance, is a marvelous document for self-government by the Christian people. But the minute you turn the document into the hands of non-Christian people and atheistic people they can use it to destroy the very foundation of our society. And that's what's been happening.

and

Pat Robertson
We have the ability to take him (Chavez) out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability


He's the Christian Osama Bin Laden. He works for the same government and everything.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 03:14 PM
link   
These people may have called themselves Christians, but their actions proove otherwise. Christ taught us to turn the other cheeck. He didn't say anything about comitting acts of terrorism. Anyone can use the Bible or religion to further their own agenda. Doesn't make them a Christian.

Edit to add: Pat Robertson is an idiot.

[edit on 5/31/2006 by darkelf]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Are you under the misperception that "all", an absolute (no room or margin for error), those being detained at Gitmo are terrorists? What about those classified as "enemy combatants" who were captured in the combat zones of Afghanistan and Iraq?


I don't think I made that assumption. And that assumption isn't necessary for the basis of my arguement.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Prayer vigils aren't terrorism. Peaceful protests aren't terrorism.
Setting off an explosive device with chemical agents inside is
criminal and may indeed by terrorism. I'll leave it to the courts
to decide if it was criminal or terrorist .. or both.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
He's the Christian Osama Bin Laden. He works for the same government and everything.

Sensationalism at it best here, nothing more.

Pat Robertson is no more a Osama bin Laden as are you or anyone else but Osama Bin Laden.

Personally, I can not stand the man, but Pat Robertson has not selected nor hand picked "terrorists" to fly planes into significant complexes or structures of significance in any Muslim country.

Pat Robertson does not work for the US government on any payroll. The man works for himself.

The Cold War is over, thus Osama Bin Laden is no longer backed by or "works" for the CIA.






seekerof



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
I don't think I made that assumption.

Did I say you did make an "assumption"?
Try "misperception."
If assumption and misperception had the same identical application or meaning, then Websters Dictionary would have no need for two separate definitions, no?




And that assumption isn't necessary for the basis of my arguement.

How about answer that which I asked, that which was necessary for the basis of your argument:


Are you under the misperception that "all", an absolute (no room or margin for error), those being detained at Gitmo are terrorists? What about those classified as "enemy combatants" who were captured in the combat zones of Afghanistan and Iraq?






seekerof



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Did I say you did make an "assumption"?
Try "misperception."
If assumption and misperception had the same identical application or meaning, then Websters Dictionary would have no need for two separate definitions, no?

Misinterpretation, Misconception, misapprehension. All different words in Websters.



How about answer that which I asked, that which was necessary for the basis of your argument:


Are you under the misperception that "all", an absolute (no room or margin for error), those being detained at Gitmo are terrorists? What about those classified as "enemy combatants" who were captured in the combat zones of Afghanistan and Iraq?

no





seekerof



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Christian + terrorist = oxymoron



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Misinterpretation, Misconception, misapprehension. All different words in Websters.

All having different meanings from "assumption," no?





How about answer that which I asked, that which was necessary for the basis of your argument:


Are you under the misperception that "all", an absolute (no room or margin for error), those being detained at Gitmo are terrorists? What about those classified as "enemy combatants" who were captured in the combat zones of Afghanistan and Iraq?

no

I figured as much.
Typical for one who simply spouts information for sensationalistic purposes or in other words, called deflection.

Btw, the topic was?







seekerof

[edit on 31-5-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
All having different meanings from "assumption," no?

Dude, in the present context assumption and misperception have a comparable meaning. If you disagree, explain it to me in context.


I figured as much.
Typical for one who simply spouts information for sensationalistic purposes or in other words, called deflection.

Btw, the topic was?


The topic was Christian terrorists. I suggest that Christian terrorists should be held in Gitmo like the other terrorists. I never said that terrorists were the only prisoners in GTMO did I??







seekerof

[edit on 31-5-2006 by Seekerof]

[edit on 31-5-2006 by Rasobasi420]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Sorry if I'm missing something, but who ARE these Christian terrorist's you're going on about?



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 01:06 AM
link   
er, did you read the article?

and i never said that we had more to worry about with christioan terrorists than islamic ones...i just said that it's abhorrent that anyone from our own country woulod resort to this crap.



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 01:43 AM
link   
What's wrong with an adult bookstore? Why become a terrorist because of a stupid adult book store? People are crazy.



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 08:36 AM
link   
Unless the Christian terrorists decide to blow up the internet, this is all in vain. I agree with R.S. on this, how rediculous is it to blow up a bookstore.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join