It is not the radical jihadists I fear. It is the Radical Right.

a reply to: Indigo5

Right...

A white supremacist got the wrong group of people. Simply because they "look" like what people think a "Muslim terrorist" ought to look like.

After talking to people over the years since 911 -- I really, honestly, and truly believe there are a lot of people in America who think this guy is hiding behind every tree:

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: LSU0408
a reply to: ElectricFeel

If you knew your family members would be killed for your actions, would you commit the crime?

Many are probably committing the act because their family members were killed.

Then they won't have anything to worry about.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: SonOfThor

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: neo96

Truth shall always prevail over falsehood in the end.

Here is some TRUTH.

When entire groups get demonized it's perfectly acceptable EXCEPT when it comes to muslims.

By "TRUTH" do you mean the opposite? Or are you absurdly suggesting no one is demonizing Muslims right now?

Now take GUN OWNERS for example that have to ASK the state for permission to exercise their constitutional RIGHTS.

Sure...I will take the San Bernardino GUN OWNERS that killed 14 people for example...they purchased and used those weapons freely under the precise absence of scrutiny and regulations that you and the NRA continue to successfully demand.

Actually those gun owners were given two of the guns via an illegal straw purchase, which is I believe a felony. This also happened in a state with some of the strictest firearms regulations and laws on the books. What other laws would have prevented this?

Whether those laws are sufficiently enforced or if new laws would make a difference is not relevant to the argument.

Neo view is that those laws and regulations themselves should not exist and are tyrannical discrimination toward gun owners. Neo is welcome to correct me if I have misrepresented what he is saying, but he has been pretty consistent in his view that there should be no regulations or restrictions on gun purchasing and transfers.

Well, what do the laws do except affect the law-abiding? As of 2013 some studies show that there are roughly 1.5 - 3.2 million "assault style" rifles owned by American citizens. In 2014, the FBI data shows only 248 murders committed with rifles (it does not designate how many of these were with "assault style" rifles. For the sake of the argument, lets say they all were. That means, of the "assault type rifles" owned roughly 0.0001% - 0.00008% were used in a murder.

Any law against these "assault style rifles" would affect the remaining 99.999% of these types of rifles that are legally owned. I agree with NEO, these laws do nothing but affect millions of law abiding citizens.

The OP stating that radical Islam does not represent Islam proper is slightly wrong. Does that mean that countries like Saudi Arabia, that practice Shariah law, are not practicing real Islam? These are significant groups of people we are talking about.

So the OP fears folks that point out that there are mainstream parts of Islam that still degrade women and limit freedom (and harbor terrorism), but doesn't feel the need to point out the radical left that wants to make laws that limit the freedoms of legal gun owners based on 0.0001% - 0.00008% of a certain type of firearm being used in a crime? Case in point, the radical left and their hoplophobia is much scarier than people being cautious about groups of people who have stated they want to kill all of us.

FBI Murder Stats 2014
Estimates of assualt style weapons privately owned

originally posted by: LSU0408
a reply to: ElectricFeel

If you knew your family members would be killed for your actions, would you commit the crime?

The terrorists who just shot a bunch of people in California were married to each other. Saudi Arabia is now ordering the execution of disabled children under ISIS control. Do you think they cared that much about their newborn they left behind?

If you have twisted your own brain around enough to believe that killing is a divine thing to do and that your own myths hold sway over the lives of innocents, you are probably not going to give a crap about your family. Even Abraham was about to sacrifice his own son based on myths and he's revered by Christians!

So no, I don't think killing innocent family members would stop that many religious people from killing others.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: ElectricFeel

1) Where is your evidence that the "majority of mass shooters were white Christian males"? From what I've read many of them leaned more towards atheism or anarchy, or were non-religious.

2) By immediately mentioning the "hundreds of thousands" of gun crime victims following this statement about white males, you are implying that white Christian males are a major source of gun crime. As others have pointed out this is patently false based on FBI data. Most gun crime is a result of gang violence or the war on drugs.

3) You say the far right is demonizing a whole group of people (Muslims) and that "Truth shall prevail over falsehood in the end". Well, the radical left demonizes a whole group of people (legal gun owners) even after mass shootings that are known to be terrorist / jihad inspired events.

If truth is to prevail you would have to acknowledge that the whole Islamaphobia narrative that you fear is exactly what the left does with their hoplophobic, anti-gun narrative.

source

Most mass shooters are white, Christian males. If you want more stats or links, I can provide them.

Legal gun owners should be fine. But so many of their guns end up in the hands of unstable family members and friends. That is one issue that should be solved.

OccupyDemocrats dot com? Really? Lol

We have never been as low as a country as we are now.

A choice between a neocon liar and deceiver in Hillary Clinton and a party of right-wing fascists (Cruz, Trump) and neocon flunkies (Rubio, Bush, Kasich, etc.) or just right-wing dunces (Carly, Christie [who is particularly foul] and the second teamers.

Bernie Sanders looks like Abe Lincoln, George Washington, and FDR in comparison!

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Indigo5

Critics of the 'radical right wing' have EXACTLY ZERO ROOM to talk.

???

I also criticize "Radical Islamists"??...Right along with the "Radical Right Wing" ??? AKA People like Trump that proposes banning all Muslims and targeting and killing the family associated with terrorists.

Kind of bizarre that you are demanding people that criticize radicals must choose one or the other to criticize..

actually that might be the premise of "Radical" thinking.

That just goes to show left wingers don't know what they are talking about.

Corey Lewandowski, Trump's campaign manager, told The Associated Press that the ban would apply to "everybody," including Muslims seeking tourist visas

www.huffingtonpost.com...

Last month, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of Trump's rivals for the GOP presidential nomination, introduced a similar proposal that would prevent refugees from obtaining tourist and immigration visas if they are from one of about 30 countries with a "significant jihadist movement."

Fearing a civil liberties backlash and "bad public relations" for the Obama administration, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson refused in early 2014 to end the secret U.S. policy that prohibited immigration officials from reviewing the social media messages of all foreign citizens applying for U.S. visas, according to a former senior department official.

abcnews.go.com...

So it should be 'business as usual' on immigration ?

Even KNOWING the vetting process DOESN'T work.

It was a temporary halt until the PROBLEM could be FIXED.

But nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

blah,blah,blah.

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: Nyiah
If people like Trump can get their way, I have no doubt there is strong potential to make people like Mao, Stalin and Hitler look like wimpy softies regarding "cleansings" of people.

There is a point when rhetoric and desire go too far, and cross over to the Demonic category. One surefire way to do it is to be even less picky & more thorough about who you kill off than your enemy.

So Trump is going to round up all of a certain religion in America and put them in camps and kill them???


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

IF he did wouldn't be any different than the Lefts Hero FDR with the Japanese or what was done to the Native Americans by ALL administrations.

They still live in 'fema camps'.

originally posted by: neo96
I have noticed after the last 15 years of the LEFT saying they are better than the RIGHT.

Yep, divide and conquer, the oldest tactic in the book.

At what point will we realize that by attacking each other, we are only serving TPTB's divide and rule agenda?

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
Personally, I would be more concerned with buying into the false "left/right" political paradigm that divides the country and prevents real change from occurring.

The battle is not between right and left; it is between us and them. ~ Dr. Antony Sutton

Domestically, the Illuminati dialectic is mirrored by George Soros who funds the left, and the Koch Brothers who fund and control the right.

Illuminati Banker Unveiled Method of Control

Would-be global rulers cannot physically control six and a half billion humans. Therefore, they must use secrecy and deceit. Keep the human herd ignorant and fighting with each other. Divide and conquer – it’s the oldest tactic in the book. And it’s relatively easy if you control the major academic institutions, the political parties and the major mass media (a mere five multinational corporations with interlocking directorships today control everything we see and hear. Jim Marrs

www.examiner.com...

For far too long, Americans have been told they exist only as members of warring camps—as Republican or Democrat, red state or blue, conservative or liberal, right or left, religious or secular, urban or rural, majority, minority and even minority/majority. It’s no coincidence that we are described by these labels—as if these labels defined us—by elites who alone stand to benefit from the very divisions they promote.

If they can convince the rest of us that we are at each other’s throats, on the verge of civil strife, these elites can make us believe our own neighbors are our enemies and that we have nothing in common but our hatred of each other.

By herding us into these warring camps, by pitting us against one another, these elites can also distract us from the real forces tearing this society apart—the unaccountable, irresponsible political establishment that now presumes to govern in our name, with no concern for anything but its own interests. By sowing these seeds of distrust, they divide and conquer, and for too long, they have succeeded.

Break the Left vs. Right Paradigm

Dr. Sutton believes the "left" versus "right" split is fraudulent and used to control the debate and condition citizens to think along certain lines. Left-wing magazines like the "The Nation" and "The New Republic" and right-wing magazines like "The National Review were "artificially set up." The former were financed by Whitney money while the latter by Buckley. Both are "The Order."

Dr. Sutton states: "Sooner or later people will wake up. First we have to dump the trap of right and left. This is a Hegelian trap to divide and control. The battle is not between right and left; it is between us and them." Similarly, in the international field left and right political structures are artificially constructed and collapsed in the drive for one-world synthesis, i.e. authoritarian socialism controlled by monopoly capital. College textbooks present war and revolution as accidental results of conflicting forces. This is nonsense, says Dr. Sutton. They are created and financed by Wall Street to create a new world order. But you won't read this in history books.

THE BATTLE IS NOT BETWEEN LEFT AND RIGHT

a reply to: Willtell

Well, I just thought of something...

This applies to BOTH parties...well, ALL parties involved in politics actually.

In a world where so much is competing for our attention -- politicians have to make themselves outrageous to get our attention. We're constantly bombarded with advertising and media on a daily basis. Just the internet alone is making Americans numb to anything but the most shocking.

So, in response politicians are behaving in bizarre and extreme ways, in order to get us to notice them.

That's a partial hypothesis of mine at least...? Maybe that's just a part of a large, more inclusive problem?

EDIT: Pretty soon politicians will be as annoying as those wacky-waving-inflatable-flailing-arm men...the ones you see at car dealerships to get your attention.

Dont worry op, the right wing fans in america will keep on blaming everyone else.

But the joke will always be on them, the witch hillary will win over the clowns they want to elect, now thats karma baby.

So how do I feel about Trumps comment about killing terrorist families ?

One the one hand family members PROFIT from the murder their sons commit.

The daughters because property, and get raped, and sold off to child marriages.

The younger brother grows up to be like his brother, or father.

Well I ain't exactly gonna condemn it, but not exactly sure I would support the practice.

I am gonna sit on the fence on that one.

a reply to: ElectricFeel

If you want to talk about gun violence, it isn't "far right" people doing the vast majority of it. Whites are causing all the mass shootings? Ghetto turds are mass shooting every day, it just goes mostly unreported, probably because they miss most of the time, and their targets are outdoors rather than inside a building.

Here is an article on mass shooters. Sure it is by Ann Coulter, but take a read if you think its white christans doing it all. In the link I believe it is a black guy who holds the record back in the 80's. With an asian holding the record in Virginia Tech.


www.anncoulter.com...

Pcg

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: neo96

Truth shall always prevail over falsehood in the end.

Here is some TRUTH.

When entire groups get demonized it's perfectly acceptable EXCEPT when it comes to muslims.

By "TRUTH" do you mean the opposite? Or are you absurdly suggesting no one is demonizing Muslims right now?

See how upset you and a few of your pals are in this thread? That's because Trump doesn't want to import muslims here until we fix the issue radical muslim ISIS issue. In the meantime, you'll constantly demonize the right and Christians. Hence the reason it was stated that it's ok to demonize some groups except for when they're muslims.

originally posted by: Sremmos80

originally posted by: LSU0408
a reply to: ElectricFeel

If you knew your family members would be killed for your actions, would you commit the crime?

Ya sounds like something out of North Korea...

Ok, so would you follow through with committing a crime or not? Try not to deflect with your answer this time please.

originally posted by: neo96
So how do I feel about Trumps comment about killing terrorist families ?

One the one hand family members PROFIT from the murder their sons commit.

The daughters because property, and get raped, and sold off to child marriages.

The younger brother grows up to be like his brother, or father.

Well I ain't exactly gonna condemn it, but not exactly sure I would support the practice.

I am gonna sit on the fence on that one.

I guess I could think of it as a late term abortion.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: ElectricFeel

Your right about it not being directed just at Muslims...

I had to correct someone just the other day that turbans are worn by Sikh people, who are not Muslim. The individual made some remark back about how "they're all the same, whatever". They also made a comment about how their skin color is all the same, so that lumps them all together.

Sadly, that kind of attitude is becoming pretty common among people I interact with.

Saying people that dress the same, look the same, are the same is not something new. And it's not sad. Maybe you have a compassion for muslims and that's why it's sad to you that he said they were the same. The turban and the beard has been a staple of muslims for quite some time and Sikhs dress and look the same as muslims. Why is it that you consider it so terrible to call them the same?

a reply to: LSU0408

You really don't get it do you?

Earlier you said something about anti-constitutional Leftists, yet in this one post show that you don't know much about the constitution and the spirit it embodies.

This nation was founded on the idea that ALL MEN ARE CREATED equal and should not only give all men the same rights endowed by their creator, but also equal application of law. That means that it is against the constitution and it's spirit to place restrictions on certain people based on their religion. Want to place a restriction based on country or region, go ahead. But religion is a no-go area.

you'll constantly demonize the right and Christians. Hence the reason it was stated that it's ok to demonize some groups except for when they're Muslims.

If this was Christians causing chaos and death in the Middle East, I'd say the same thing as I did about Muslims. The problem is, which many have yet to comprehend, is that it is the Christian Right in this country that is trying to be the oppressors. When we point that out and call bull#, they pull the victim card and complain they are being demonized.

Has it ever occurred to you that we wouldn't be up in your face if you weren't trying to stop people from being free?

It still blows my mind how out of all the threads we've have like this where the left comes crying out in delusional agony and within the first few responses to their topic a majority of their OP is factually corrected... yet these threads still pop up. It's like they don't even read beyond they're own post.

Deny Ignorance ...and absorb information, especially if it contradicts your position.