ADVERTISEMENT

Ohio State perp.... drumroll please....

MegaPoke said:
In his defense, maybe he's a Michigan fan. They did win the overal time of possession after all. Just protesting the final score.
Click to expand...
Didn't you call Sys a monster for trying to score political points of off similar attacks?
 
This was probably all a false flag anyway. Crisis actors heavily involved.
 
Pilt, you have to admit that given that Somalia is clearly known as a terrorist refuge country, and our current PeOTUS ran on a platform about restricting specifically these types of refuges from entering the US, that there is a clear political connection beyond whether the individual's affiliated party.
 
MegaPoke said:
No it was a misleading question. And the only thing in common was commentary on a current event. Other than that, the burden is on you to prove me wrong. Find it and let's discuss the context.
Click to expand...
I guess you are right. You find quoting the family members of victims political statements to be ghoulish. But no evidence that you find scoring political points off of tragedies to be monstrous. You win this one.
aix_xpert said:
Pilt, you have to admit that given that Somalia is clearly known as a terrorist refuge country, and our current PeOTUS ran on a platform about restricting specifically these types of refuges from entering the US, that there is a clear political connection beyond whether the individual's affiliated party.
Click to expand...
Also clearly connected to vote recounts and the popular vote.
 
I have no issue with the execution of recounts. I just expect that we meet the legal criteria specified to execute it, which thus far, I haven't seen. In most cases, recounts are automatic if the election results are close enough to warrant. Apparantly that wasn't the case as recounts weren't automatically initiated. Regardless, I find it worthless for two reasons:
1) To overturn the election, you'd be required to find clear evidence of tampering across multiple states using independent and varied voting platforms (including a completely paper-based system in MI). This isn't Al Gore trying to find 10K votes in one state to flip the win. Clinton needs 150K votes across 3 states to be flipped to win.
2) Confirming Trump's presidency won't end the left's fighting. Your comrades (appropriate for socialists) will still be protesting once the recounts are counted, and will still be harassing electoral voters, and then will still be marching in DC on inauguration day. So what's the point?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
aix_xpert said:
I have no issue with the execution of recounts. I just expect that we meet the legal criteria specified to execute it, which thus far, I haven't seen. In most cases, recounts are automatic if the election results are close enough to warrant. Apparantly that wasn't the case as recounts weren't automatically initiated. Regardless, I find it worthless for two reasons:
1) To overturn the election, you'd be required to find clear evidence of tampering across multiple states using independent and varied voting platforms (including a completely paper-based system in MI). This isn't Al Gore trying to find 10K votes in one state to flip the win. Clinton needs 150K votes across 3 states to be flipped to win.
2) Confirming Trump's presidency won't end the left's fighting. Your comrades (appropriate for socialists) will still be protesting once the recounts are counted, and will still be harassing electoral voters, and then will still be marching in DC on inauguration day. So what's the point?
Click to expand...
Yeah, there is a thread all about it. My point is it has nothing to do with this tOSU incident.
 
07pilt said:
I guess you are right. You find quoting the family members of victims political statements to be ghoulish. But no evidence that you find scoring political points off of tragedies to be monstrous. You win this one.
Click to expand...

I actually called @syskatine's behavior "ghoulish" if I recall correctly - which I admit is a bit of a fine point, but I did not call him a monster, even though I happily would. And, he was specifically calling out me and others for having supported the 2nd Amendment, using a fresh pile of bodies as fuel. I am pretty sure he had a bunch of factual errors in the post, but I'm not going to loo for it. Regardless, he'll probably be along to comment to you on this thread for the benefit of a third party audience (the rest of us) about how you are right, and I'm a hypocrite - or something. It'll be vaguely entertaining for a few days probably.

To be clear though, I hadn't even yet made a specific political point out of this "tragedy*." You can feel free to draw your own conclusions about what I had said prior to the point that you commented, but mainly it was bad jokes about the tOSU Michigan game being vaguely analogous to snowflakes protesting the presidential election, popular vote etc.

Since you have injected your typical humorless snark into the thread however, I'll be happy to pontificate and maybe have something worth discussing.

In my opinion...

Abdul probably shouldn't have been here. It's so cliche, that it almost feels racist to say "Abdul shouldn't have been here" but there you go. He should've been better vetted, filtered, sent back to Somolia or Pakistan or isolated from society somehow. I'm sure we will find out more about his radicalization in Pakistan or some such predictable shit and hindsight will once again be 20/20 that this was a guy who should've been dead, locked up or at minimum not here.

At this point, all we know is that he was sad about Islamaphobia. So sad evidently that he weaponized himself and became a caricature of the exact kind of person who made Islamaphobia a thing.

This story just illustrates that Islamic violence created Islamaphobia - not the other way around. Islam isn't a race or a sexual orientation. It's an oppressive and violent religious ideology and Bill Mahr is 100% right about it. Just another story that sounds like every other story about an Islamic lunatic with a gun, knife, machete, truck, bomb or any other handy way of jihading you to death.

*maybe it's just me, but I think tragedies are more accurately accidental events such as natural catastrophes, automobile accidents etc. This appears to be a violent ideological rampage (ie. Islamic terrorism).
 
MegaPoke said:
Abdul probably shouldn't have been here. It's so cliche, that it almost feels racist to say "Abdul shouldn't have been here" but there you go. He should've been better vetted, filtered, sent back to Somolia or Pakistan or isolated from society somehow. I'm sure we will find out more about his radicalization in Pakistan or some such predictable shit and hindsight will once again be 20/20 that this was a guy who should've been dead, locked up or at minimum not here.
Click to expand...
It would be hard to second guess his admittance to the US if it came before the first real evidence of this sort of thing becoming a risk, which could date to the Fort Hood shooting, or the San Bernardino shooting. It would be even harder to second guess if his arrival pre-dated 9/11. Do we know when he got here? Unless this guy was straight off the boat it is hard to see what kind of radicalization you would catch doing vetting on someone who was a teenager.
MegaPoke said:
This story just illustrates that Islamic violence created Islamaphobia - not the other way around. Islam isn't a race or a sexual orientation. It's an oppressive and violent religious ideology and Bill Mahr is 100% right about it. Just another story that sounds like every other story about an Islamic lunatic with a gun, knife, machete, truck, bomb or any other handy way of jihading you to death.
Click to expand...
Whether Bill Maher is technically correct or not is irrelevant, because calling an entire religion violent and oppressive doesn't advance the cause of ending that violence or oppression. The violence and oppression is the enemy, not the religion. Holy war against the whole of Islam seems pretty drastic to solve a problem that probably wouldn't exist had either (not even both) Bush or Obama not completely bungled Middle East policy. Just one good president in the last 16 years and we aren't talking about ISIS.

MegaPoke said:
*maybe it's just me, but I think tragedies are more accurately accidental events such as natural catastrophes, automobile accidents etc. This appears to be a violent ideological rampage (ie. Islamic terrorism).
Click to expand...
Tragedy describes the effect more than the cause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MegaPoke
07pilt said:
calling an entire religion violent and oppressive doesn't advance the cause of ending that violence or oppression.
Click to expand...
Yet again, nobody has called "an entire religion" violent and oppressive, although that description is a solid factual description of the teachings of Islam. You brainiacs on the left should be saying that we shouldn't call all people who follow Islam violent and oppressive. You'd have a better point, but you'd still be wrong.

Islamic extremists don't make their religious basis for their terrorist activities up out of thin air. It's all there in the Quran for anyone to read. The majority of Muslims are peaceful, but the majority also live in societies where they are the overwhelming majority and thus jihad against infidels isn't an everyday issue. Religious minorities in Muslim countries are barely if at all visible. If you think most Muslims are tolerant people, you're dead wrong. Westernized Muslims have almost nothing in common with Muslims from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, etc. Egypt, Jordan, and Syria are notable exceptions because they have been very secular in their leadership and have larger non-Muslim populations.

The proposal to suspend immigration from Muslim countries that have a problem with radical Islam is a safe defensive move, not racist or Islamophobic. That probably is never realistic since almost all Muslim countries have radical Islamists. But, if that were narrowed down to countries in which the USA is involved militarily against groups like ISIS, that wouldn't be unreasonable in the short term given the current issues with being able to vet these refugees/immigrants. Our Middle East allies sure aren't stepping up to the plate and there's a reason why.
 
  • Like
Reactions: imprimis and windriverrange
Medic007 said:
Our Middle East allies sure aren't stepping up to the plate and there's a reason why.
Click to expand...

They're also not stepping up to the plate on another front...but mentioning this is some sort of racist hate mongering, or so I'm told:

From Amnesty International:

Gulf countries including Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Bahrain have offered zero resettlement places to Syrian refugees.

Odd that we get told that we shouldn't question our own immigration policies while neighboring countries just deny any immigration....but then again, letting the refugees from a civil war you're funding and prolonging in is probably a bad idea.
 
jkosu said:
They're also not stepping up to the plate on another front...but mentioning this is some sort of racist hate mongering, or so I'm told:

From Amnesty International:

Gulf countries including Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Bahrain have offered zero resettlement places to Syrian refugees.

Odd that we get told that we shouldn't question our own immigration policies while neighboring countries just deny any immigration....but then again, letting the refugees from a civil war you're funding and prolonging in is probably a bad idea.
Click to expand...
That's what I was referring to. Thanks for posting that. And it isn't just about the funding. It's about furthering the radicalism that affects the status quo of Gulf nations. They don't want anybody questioning the monarchies.
 
syskatine said:
Wonder whose killed more Americans this year: Muslims or Christians?
Click to expand...
Why not regale us all with your "statistics?" Surely you can produce a verifiable answer with your level of 30+ gun owning/loving/hating brilliance. Guesses and Huffpo/CNN/MSNBC/Slate/Salon/liberal rag etc opinion pieces don't count.

Go!
 
Medic007 said:
Yet again, nobody has called "an entire religion" violent and oppressive, although that description is a solid factual description of the teachings of Islam. You brainiacs on the left should be saying that we shouldn't call all people who follow Islam violent and oppressive. You'd have a better point, but you'd still be wrong.

Islamic extremists don't make their religious basis for their terrorist activities up out of thin air. It's all there in the Quran for anyone to read. The majority of Muslims are peaceful, but the majority also live in societies where they are the overwhelming majority and thus jihad against infidels isn't an everyday issue. Religious minorities in Muslim countries are barely if at all visible. If you think most Muslims are tolerant people, you're dead wrong. Westernized Muslims have almost nothing in common with Muslims from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, etc. Egypt, Jordan, and Syria are notable exceptions because they have been very secular in their leadership and have larger non-Muslim populations.

The proposal to suspend immigration from Muslim countries that have a problem with radical Islam is a safe defensive move, not racist or Islamophobic. That probably is never realistic since almost all Muslim countries have radical Islamists. But, if that were narrowed down to countries in which the USA is involved militarily against groups like ISIS, that wouldn't be unreasonable in the short term given the current issues with being able to vet these refugees/immigrants. Our Middle East allies sure aren't stepping up to the plate and there's a reason why.
Click to expand...
"Islam isn't a race or a sexual orientation. It's an oppressive and violent religious ideology"

I don't get this post at all.
Medic: No one is calling "an entire religion" violent and oppressive, but if they did they would be totally right.
 
Marshal Jim Duncan said:
How many self-identifying Christians have killed an American while shouting " Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God Alimghty, Who was and is and is to come" or something similar?

Zero, right?
Click to expand...

I don't know. McVeigh and Koresh come to mind.

I appreciate the distinction, and I agree you don't see Christian clergy calling for jihad, and you don't see Christians or western democracies generally prohibiting women to vote, drive, go to school, etc. What I can't appreciate is why we are so concerned if 10 people are killed for religious reasons while 14,000 are killed for other motivations. I think, can't prove -- just think -- that it kind of feels good to rail against someone that is really different. On an intellectual level it's the same, but some people have a more alarmist reaction to a muslim than Dylan Roof.
 
syskatine said:
I don't know. McVeigh and Koresh come to mind.

I appreciate the distinction, and I agree you don't see Christian clergy calling for jihad, and you don't see Christians or western democracies generally prohibiting women to vote, drive, go to school, etc. What I can't appreciate is why we are so concerned if 10 people are killed for religious reasons while 14,000 are killed for other motivations. I think, can't prove -- just think -- that it kind of feels good to rail against someone that is really different. On an intellectual level it's the same, but some people have a more alarmist reaction to a muslim than Dylan Roof.
Click to expand...

Did McVeigh kill an American this year? Did Koresh ever kill anyone before being raided by the Feds (and I'm not even sure he personally did it then)?
 
Marshal Jim Duncan said:
Did McVeigh kill an American this year? Did Koresh ever kill anyone before being raided by the Feds (and I'm not even sure he personally did it then)?
Click to expand...

No, but don't move the goalposts on me, Glove. You didn't specify this year or month.

I don't know that he killed any of the kids he was molesting. Probably not, as killing those kids would complicate molesting them. So Christians are better then?
 
syskatine said:
I don't know. McVeigh and Koresh come to mind.

I appreciate the distinction, and I agree you don't see Christian clergy calling for jihad, and you don't see Christians or western democracies generally prohibiting women to vote, drive, go to school, etc. What I can't appreciate is why we are so concerned if 10 people are killed for religious reasons while 14,000 are killed for other motivations. I think, can't prove -- just think -- that it kind of feels good to rail against someone that is really different. On an intellectual level it's the same, but some people have a more alarmist reaction to a muslim than Dylan Roof.
Click to expand...

@ThePokewithNoName would have insight on this, but I think you've basically named a cultist, a militant domestic political terrorist and a guy in Roof who is batshit crazy.

I can't see that you've listed a single relatable Christian archetype - and there are some reliably crazy ones - but no dogmatic murdererers or terrorists. None.
 
MegaPoke said:
@ThePokewithNoName would have insight on this, but I think you've basically named a cultist, a militant domestic political terrorist and a guy in Roof who is batshit crazy.

I can't see that you've listed a single relatable Christian archetype - and there are some reliably crazy ones - but no dogmatic murdererers or terrorists. None.
Click to expand...
People following/clinging to these guys today literally number into the dozens, dude.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MegaPoke
Marshal Jim Duncan said:
You did.
Click to expand...

Marshal Jim Duncan said:
How many self-identifying Christians have killed an American while shouting " Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God Alimghty, Who was and is and is to come" or something similar?
Click to expand...

No sir, I was answering your question. I don't want to be accused of deviating from "the point" which seems to focus around your questions, but not mine.
 
MegaPoke said:
@ThePokewithNoName would have insight on this, but I think you've basically named a cultist, a militant domestic political terrorist and a guy in Roof who is batshit crazy.

I can't see that you've listed a single relatable Christian archetype - and there are some reliably crazy ones - but no dogmatic murdererers or terrorists. None.
Click to expand...

Islamic fundamentalists blow up buildings with children in it, slit throats, and declare jihad against anyone that disagrees with them.

Christian fundamentalists build buildings to house, clothe, feed, and teach children; heal wounds; and declare that they'll pray for anyone that disagrees with them. If they love you like they claim they do, they'll also share their faith with you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

OKSTATE1

Oklahoma State football fills assistant coaching vacancies with familiar names

Replies
10
Views
887
The Corral
OSU_Sports_Nut
OSU_Sports_Nut
OKSTATE1

Mike Gundy buyout: Contract details for Oklahoma State football coach

Replies
5
Views
938
The Corral
OKSTATE1
OKSTATE1
aix_xpert

I think I found why Pubs are talking about Virginia

Replies
11
Views
544
24/7 Politics
aix_xpert
aix_xpert
OKSTATE1

Oklahoma State football to hire OU assistant Kevin Johns as QB coach, per report

Replies
0
Views
562
The Corral
OKSTATE1
OKSTATE1
OKSTATE1

Original Hamas Charter - From the River to the Sea

Replies
48
Views
3K
24/7 Politics
OUSOONER67
OUSOONER67
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back