Trump still has not condemned the Minnesota mosque bombing

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Grambler

Oh bull.

Oh whats that?

You find it ridiculous to have someone claim you don't care about the victims of Islamic terror?

Then perhaps you should check yourself before making claims like this.

Terrorism against Muslims is okay in the eyes of many right wingers. Apparently including the US President.

It's been on the local news here every night.

With a constant stream of politicians and locals jumping on camera and crying about terrorism. Frankly, I was going to make a thread, but I didn't want to deal with it.

I find some things interesting about it.

The time of day(5am, who would expect anyone to be there by then). Almost a better time to pick if you were NOT trying to harm anyone.

The relatively little amount of damage, which isn't strange by itself. But coupled with a go fund me page with a 100K goal to repair what amounts to a damaged window and some blinds and wood trim around the window. Seems a bit unrealistic to me.


ETA: I almost forgot, A few days ago someone went into a local church in the same area(TC METRO) and tried to light it on fire by starting some piles of trash on fire. While unrelated, it seems like a similar goal with a similar success rate(minimal damage, no injuries). It was briefly covered and not followed up on. A casual viewer may allow that to add to the questions surrounding the other event.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: DanteGaland

I just checked with him and he is sad, and outraged. So you are all good here, have a super day.

what's his golf score today?

a reply to: DanteGaland

Be afraid.

Be very afraid !!

originally posted by: Kali74
But if an anarchist lights a dumpster on fire it's a domestic terror attack and we'd be ten pages in with the NRA PSA posted several times.

We'd be 20 pages in and screaming about travel bans and immigration if a Muslim was driving a van.

But they can't really be real Anarchists can they?

A real Anarchist wouldn't be doing anything anywhere near an established society location would they?

They would be (should be) away from society right?

And keep up the good work bashing Members and "People" with 90% of your dramatic posts !!

a reply to: MisterSpock

On Saturday fajr (the dawn prayer time for Muslims) started at 4:25 and lasted until 5:59. So I would expect at least a few people at the mosque at 5 AM.

a reply to: Grambler

I said many... not all. Sorry but I'm calling out the hypocrisy. I don't believe that anyone needs to condemn violence in order to prove they don't support it but every time there's a terror attack where the monster is a Muslim the question of why don't they condemn it appears in nearly every post and when Obama was president? He was an apologist if he didn't call it a terrorist attack within five minutes.

originally posted by: DanteGaland

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: DanteGaland

What!?!? An article that takes a negative approach at the POTUS from WaPo? Oh my, we never see that!
WaPo owner Jeff Bezos has an axe to grind with this administration thanks to his other business, a little thing called Amazon, and their Trillion dollar corporation's antitrust violations which this admin will eventually decide to come down on.

It's not fake news, it's just fake outrage and a personally motivated attack campaign.

Glad to SEE you. You seem to love my threads and posts. I can reliably depend on your INPUT

Now...FAKE NEWS? That's a harsh allegation. Are we not allowed to question our elected leaders? Why the silence?

WHY was Obama held to a different standard? He at least DID say something (just not the 'right words').

So...if Trump said words, just any words at all, it would be enough to shut you up then? Or would you only feel less fake outrage if they were the "RIGHT" words?

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Grambler

I said many... not all. Sorry but I'm calling out the hypocrisy. I don't believe that anyone needs to condemn violence in order to prove they don't support it but every time there's a terror attack where the monster is a Muslim the question of why don't they condemn it appears in nearly every post and when Obama was president? He was an apologist if he didn't call it a terrorist attack within five minutes.

Do you believe that Obama didn't care about Islamic terror incidents when he didn't condemn them?

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: MisterSpock

On Saturday fajr (the dawn prayer time for Muslims) started at 4:25 and lasted until 5:59. So I would expect at least a few people at the mosque at 5 AM.

I went back and read some local stories, and I do see they said that local prayer had begun. While I did recall them saying it was empty(the report that I heard the day it happened), it appears that was in error.

Overall though, I still do find the amount to be confusing. While not sinister in nature, it may just be bilking the fools that commonly rush to go fund me for their own personal gratification.

100K is about 5 times the cost of the repairs, in my opinion, from what little pictures I've seen of the damage.

originally posted by: MisterSpock
It's been on the local news here every night.

With a constant stream of politicians and locals jumping on camera and crying about terrorism. Frankly, I was going to make a thread, but I didn't want to deal with it.

I find some things interesting about it.

The time of day(5am, who would expect anyone to be there by then). Almost a better time to pick if you were NOT trying to harm anyone.

The relatively little amount of damage, which isn't strange by itself. But coupled with a go fund me page with a 100K goal to repair what amounts to a damaged window and some blinds and wood trim around the window. Seems a bit unrealistic to me.


ETA: I almost forgot, A few days ago someone went into a local church in the same area(TC METRO) and tried to light it on fire by starting some piles of trash on fire. While unrelated, it seems like a similar goal with a similar success rate(minimal damage, no injuries). It was briefly covered and not followed up on. A casual viewer may allow that to add to the questions surrounding the other event.

It's almost as if they bombed themselves. GASP

a reply to: DanteGaland

He didnt know. Very few did. Many killed???

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: DanteGaland

Like you guys would give him credit for condemning it anyways. Probably would claim he wasn't sincere and spin it somehow.

Faux-outrage galore with you lot.

Receiving credit isn't the reason you are supposed to do the right thing...

a reply to: DanteGaland

The act of "condemning" is about as ridiculous as changing a Facebook profile to have an overlayed French flag after a terrorist attack--it literally does nothing.

Look, people need to start realizing that Trump doesn't appear to follow the "norm" when it comes to social communication. Condemnations and the like are a waste of time, except for a politician. Now, I'm sure that in the next few years, as he turns into a politician, they may flow from his mouth like spittle when he rants about a border wall, but that will not change the fact: Condemnations do absolutely nothing.

Isn't religious freedom a RIGHT granted for everyone? Would it be so HARD for Trump to Tweet a sentence or TWO?

Silence from a president on an incident--ANY incident--does not mean that the right no longer exists, or that he's undermining that right. Come on...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The point I'm trying to make is Trump CAN'T do the right thing, no matter what, in the eyes of many lefties.

a reply to: MisterSpock

Since this is a conspiracy site, it's worth noting that this wouldn't be the first instance of a minority or 'oppressed group' committing violence or vandalism against themselves for the sake of pity or pushing a narrative.

I'm not in any way saying that this is what happened, but when I first heard about this and the same details that you're noting, the possibility did creep into my mind.

a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

No #. That's what is wrong with your post. It doesn't matter in this case. The President speaking out on a tragedy is just the right thing to do. Saying that he doesn't have to do it because liberals won't acknowledge him is petty and inhumane.

originally posted by: growler

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: DanteGaland

I just checked with him and he is sad, and outraged. So you are all good here, have a super day.

what's his golf score today?

He shot a 78. Not bad, but I think he used a foot wedge when I wasn't looking. #ing cheater.

originally posted by: DanteGaland
Now...FAKE NEWS? That's a harsh allegation.

I appear wherever The Narrative™ is being desperately pushed, so...

I think I was pretty clear in my statement above "It's not fake news." That said, if it protects the shield of The Narrative™ for you to claim I took that direction, then I'm not surprised at all.

Obama was held to a different standard... rarely criticized by the media, allowed to claim "RACISM!!" as a shield against any criticism, offered token resistance by the establishment GOP only to have them bend deeply for him before all was said and done. You'd have to ask people like Bezos, Zucker, and Boehner why Obama was held to a looser standard, because I have no clue why anyone gave the fool a pass.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The hell are you even saying?

There is nothing wrong with my post, but maybe your comprehension. Where did I say he doesn't have to do it?

The MAIN point of my post is this THREAD is nothing but faux-outrage..