PDA

View Full Version : Can we now at long last...................



TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 02:31 AM
.........call it Islamic Terrorism?

I realize it is a bit too soon (meaning that claimed credit hasn't been confirmed) but I am fairly comfortable climbing out on that limb.

I imagine every French citizen has no problem with the label.

Rusty Jones
11-14-2015, 02:57 AM
.........call it Islamic Terrorism?

I realize it is a bit too soon (meaning that claimed credit hasn't been confirmed) but I am fairly comfortable climbing out on that limb.

I imagine every French citizen has no problem with the label.

Unlike the US, France is a nation state. They don't get to be held to same standard.

garhkal
11-14-2015, 03:38 AM
I sure as heck would have no issue calling it what it is.. ISLAMIC terrorism.. but i bet that Obama won't utter those 2 words together..

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 03:59 AM
Unlike the US, France is a nation state. They don't get to be held to same standard.

What? Not that I understand your point (AA help me out) but the US is NOT a nation-state?

Rusty Jones
11-14-2015, 04:00 AM
I sure as heck would have no issue calling it what it is.. ISLAMIC terrorism.. but i bet that Obama won't utter those 2 words together..

Dubya never uttered those two words together either. Furthermore, Ted Cruz and Bobby Jindal seem to be the only ones who really care about that.

There are Christian terrorist groups as well. Like the Lord's Resistance Army, led by Jospeh Kony. As soon as Obama mentions sending in troops to Uganda to stop them, Rush Limbaugh and others attribute it to his "war on Christianity."

Rusty Jones
11-14-2015, 04:03 AM
What? Not that I understand your point (AA help me out) but the US is NOT a nation-state?

A nation state is a country centered around a particular ethnic group. "American" is a nationality. It means you're a citizen of the US. However, "American" is not an ethnicity. "French" is.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 04:10 AM
A nation state is a country centered around a particular ethnic group. "American" is a nationality. It means you're a citizen of the US. However, "American" is not an ethnicity. "French" is.

You don't know much about France in 2015 do you.

Rusty Jones
11-14-2015, 04:13 AM
You don't know much about France in 2015 do you.

What, that's a diverse country? I know that. That doesn't change the fact that it's still a nation state. Furthermore, the French government recognizes all citizens as ethnically French, whether they are or not.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 04:17 AM
Dubya never uttered those two words together either. Furthermore, Ted Cruz and Bobby Jindal seem to be the only ones who really care about that.

There are Christian terrorist groups as well. Like the Lord's Resistance Army, led by Jospeh Kony. As soon as Obama mentions sending in troops to Uganda to stop them, Rush Limbaugh and others attribute it to his "war on Christianity."

That was predictable. When the LRA can come within even the same universe as ISIS and other ISLAMIC TERRORIST groups then you would have cogent and relevant comparison.

Am I right in reading that this is somehow Bush's fault?

Listen, this isn't a huge deal. The fact is that most people with approximately a 101 IQ realize the what we are seeing in France tonight and around the world for decades is Islamic Terrorism. Instead of simply making the message the we shouldn't paint an entire religion because of the actions of a minority (although that minority numbers more than 350 million) instead a great deal of effort and time is spent bending the narrative. Time and effort which doesn't help and some would say emboldens the 350 million 'minority'

For the reasonable and intelligent this isn't a Dem or GOP issue it is common sense.

Rusty Jones
11-14-2015, 04:55 AM
That was predictable. When the LRA can come within even the same universe as ISIS and other ISLAMIC TERRORIST groups then you would have cogent and relevant comparison.

The size and power is irrelavant. The point is, Christian terrorist groups do exist. But you and garhkal don't want to talk about "Christian terrorism." It only matters to point out religion when they're not Christian.


Am I right in reading that this is somehow Bush's fault?

Man... I mention Bush, and all of a sudden I'm saying "it's Bush's fault," right? What I'm saying is that garhkal is unfairly singling Obama out for something that even the politicians that he supports are likely guilty of themselves.


Listen, this isn't a huge deal. The fact is that most people with approximately a 101 IQ realize the what we are seeing in France tonight and around the world for decades is Islamic Terrorism. Instead of simply making the message the we shouldn't paint an entire religion because of the actions of a minority (although that minority numbers more than 350 million) instead a great deal of effort and time is spent bending the narrative. Time and effort which doesn't help and some would say emboldens the 350 million 'minority'

For the reasonable and intelligent this isn't a Dem or GOP issue it is common sense.

Maybe, and I'm not really worried about that. Garhkal has had his views of Islam long before today, and he's treating this incident like a smoking gun.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 05:31 AM
What, that's a diverse country? I know that. That doesn't change the fact that it's still a nation state. Furthermore, the French government recognizes all citizens as ethnically French, whether they are or not.

Ok, let's put that complete bullshit aside. How is France being a nation-state and the US not being one (in your opinion, which btw depends on whose definition you use) relate to the point of whether or not what is happening around the world is or is not Islamic Terrorism?

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 05:38 AM
The size and power is irrelavant. The point is, Christian terrorist groups do exist. But you and garhkal don't want to talk about "Christian terrorism." It only matters to point out religion when they're not Christian..

If you want to call the LRA Christian Terrorists fine. But the comparison is specious and does nothing to bolster the completely asinine position of the Obama administration that what is going on in France today and around the world is NOT Islamic Terrorism.


Man... I mention Bush, and all of a sudden I'm saying "it's Bush's fault," right? What I'm saying is that garhkal is unfairly singling Obama out for something that even the politicians that he supports are likely guilty of themselves.



Maybe, and I'm not really worried about that. Garhkal has had his views of Islam long before today, and he's treating this incident like a smoking gun.

Why is it when I question your position and words, Garhkal is you go-to defense? We were not discussing anything Garhkal said. My post quoted you and only you and your post quoted me and only me. However in this case Garhkal is absolutely right. Obama is completely "crazy' in this position that we are not witnessing Islamic Terrorism around the world.

My opinion of your complete inane and parochial mindset is in no way an endorsement or condemnation of anyone else on the MTF and to assert otherwise is just another deficient train of thought.

garhkal
11-14-2015, 07:13 AM
The size and power is irrelavant. The point is, Christian terrorist groups do exist. But you and garhkal don't want to talk about "Christian terrorism." It only matters to point out religion when they're not Christian.

Maybe that is cause i have not heard on the news, about these Christian terror groups killing dozens of people day after day, week after week, like we do with muslims.



Maybe, and I'm not really worried about that. Garhkal has had his views of Islam long before today, and he's treating this incident like a smoking gun.

Which it is.. THIS JUST goes to prove Islam is in no way a religion of peace.
When their OWN holy book commands them to kill infidels where ever they can, lie to infidels, KILL their own people (wifes/daughters) cause they bring percieved shame on the family, how can ANYONE of good conscience call it a religion if peace is beyond me.

sandsjames
11-14-2015, 11:10 AM
Really. A country is attacked and the first thing you guys want to discuss is terminology? How about we talk about this being France's 9-11. A country that we like to make fun of but a country who has been our ally longer than anyone and who is a huge reason we are a country at all. How about discussing how dangerous this makes ISIS (or whoever it is) being able to get away with this organized of an attack while avoiding all of the intelligence gathering communities of the most advanced countries in the world. My worries this morning are not about what to call the attack. I'll stick with the French President on this one and call it what it is. An act of war.

Rusty Jones
11-14-2015, 12:16 PM
Ok, let's put that complete bullshit aside. How is France being a nation-state and the US not being one (in your opinion, which btw depends on whose definition you use) relate to the point of whether or not what is happening around the world is or is not Islamic Terrorism?

You said that you believe that the French are less likely to have a problem labeling it as "Islamic Terrorism." Nation states tend to be a bit more insular and xenophobic in their thinking.

Rusty Jones
11-14-2015, 12:27 PM
If you want to call the LRA Christian Terrorists fine. But the comparison is specious and does nothing to bolster the completely asinine position of the Obama administration that what is going on in France today and around the world is NOT Islamic Terrorism.

I'm not comparing the two. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy. Why was no one twisting Obama's arm to call the LRA "Christian terrorists?" Why is Obama the only one getting his arm twisted to say "Islamic terrorism?" Remember, 9/11 happened on Bush's watch... AND we spent the remaining 7 years and 4 months of his presidency dealing with "Islamic Terrorism." So where were you, garhkal, and everyone else bitching and moaning about Obama not saying "Islamic terrorism" during those 7 years and 4 months that Bush never said it? Why were none of you twisting Bush's arm to say it?

Again, so far, of all the GOP candidates, Jindal and Cruz are the only ones saying it. What about the rest? Why is no one on their asses about it? Why ONLY Obama?

Why doesn't simply "terrorism" suffice? Because it doesn't echo your personal feelings toward Islam?


Why is it when I question your position and words, Garhkal is you go-to defense? We were not discussing anything Garhkal said. My post quoted you and only you and your post quoted me and only me. However in this case Garhkal is absolutely right. Obama is completely "crazy' in this position that we are not witnessing Islamic Terrorism around the world.

My opinion of your complete inane and parochial mindset is in no way an endorsement or condemnation of anyone else on the MTF and to assert otherwise is just another deficient train of thought.

Garhkal started this thread and, as you just admitted here, you completely agree with him. By the way, I don't think Obama has ever said that we're not seeing Islamaic terrorism. Your gripe is over him not using a word. A word that, unless you're a Cruz or Jindal supporter, your candidate has never said himself.

Rusty Jones
11-14-2015, 12:31 PM
Maybe that is cause i have not heard on the news, about these Christian terror groups killing dozens of people day after day, week after week, like we do with muslims.



Which it is.. THIS JUST goes to prove Islam is in no way a religion of peace.
When their OWN holy book commands them to kill infidels where ever they can, lie to infidels, KILL their own people (wifes/daughters) cause they bring percieved shame on the family, how can ANYONE of good conscience call it a religion if peace is beyond me.

Speaking of "smoking guns," if we atheists thought the same way you did, we'd have enough smoking guns on Christians to arm an army every time word gets out that a pastor raped a little boy (and, no, it's not just Catholics either).

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 01:38 PM
You said that you believe that the French are less likely to have a problem labeling it as "Islamic Terrorism." Nation states tend to be a bit more insular and xenophobic in their thinking.

The hole is getting deeper. Until recent years (meaning the rise of radical Islamic terrorism which has touched France) they had the reputation as being one of the most inclusive countries in Europe. This goes back decades.

sandsjames
11-14-2015, 01:53 PM
The hole is getting deeper. Until recent years (meaning the rise of radical Islamic terrorism which has touched France) they had the reputation as being one of the most inclusive countries in Europe. This goes back decades.

Inclusive? Don't forget, they have a law that bans faces being covered, not allowing Muslim women to wear normal garb. On one hand, if people choose to live there, they know the requirements. On the other hand, not so much inclusive as conformist. Either way, I hope their President follows through with the "no mercy" that he promised last night. Obviously sitting around and waiting isn't getting anything accomplished.

Rusty Jones
11-14-2015, 01:57 PM
The hole is getting deeper. Until recent years (meaning the rise of radical Islamic terrorism which has touched France) they had the reputation as being one of the most inclusive countries in Europe. This goes back decades.

Actually, it's not. Because the French government officially considers all citizens to be ethnically French, there's no official demographics information to break down the population. However, most estimates put the ethnic French at 85% of the population.

It would also be interesting to see how the general population reacts toward citizens who are, or are perceived to be, Muslim. If what I'm saying is correct, A Muslim in France is more likely to be a victim of violence than a Muslim in the US.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 01:59 PM
Inclusive? Don't forget, they have a law that bans faces being covered, not allowing Muslim women to wear normal garb. On one hand, if people choose to live there, they know the requirements. On the other hand, not so much inclusive as conformist. Either way, I hope their President follows through with the "no mercy" that he promised last night. Obviously sitting around and waiting isn't getting anything accomplished.


".....................Until recent years (meaning the rise of radical Islamic terrorism which has touched France)................."

I agree that very tough measures are needed while at the same time fearing the long term effect of those measures.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 02:03 PM
Actually, it's not. Because the French government officially considers all citizens to be ethnically French, there's no official demographics information to break down the population. However, most estimates put the ethnic French at 85% of the population.

It would also be interesting to see how the general population reacts toward citizens who are, or are perceived to be, Muslim. If what I'm saying is correct, A Muslim in France is more likely to be a victim of violence than a Muslim in the US.

Good God you can really be dense. I don't care what the official policy of France is in labeling their citizens. Are you seriously going to say that makes everyone blind to the origins of these people?

You and SJ need to read my post. France today is not France of the past. Your post attempted to label France as historically "more insular and xenophobic in their thinking". I say that (until recently) just isn't true.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 02:08 PM
What the Hell is wrong with the cut and paste functions in the MTF?!?!

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 02:32 PM
I'm not comparing the two. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy. Why was no one twisting Obama's arm to call the LRA "Christian terrorists?" Why is Obama the only one getting his arm twisted to say "Islamic terrorism?" Remember, 9/11 happened on Bush's watch... AND we spent the remaining 7 years and 4 months of his presidency dealing with "Islamic Terrorism." So where were you, garhkal, and everyone else bitching and moaning about Obama not saying "Islamic terrorism" during those 7 years and 4 months that Bush never said it? Why were none of you twisting Bush's arm to say it?

Again, so far, of all the GOP candidates, Jindal and Cruz are the only ones saying it. What about the rest? Why is no one on their asses about it? Why ONLY Obama?

Why doesn't simply "terrorism" suffice? Because it doesn't echo your personal feelings toward Islam?



Garhkal started this thread and, as you just admitted here, you completely agree with him. By the way, I don't think Obama has ever said that we're not seeing Islamaic terrorism. Your gripe is over him not using a word. A word that, unless you're a Cruz or Jindal supporter, your candidate has never said himself.

I have been trying for an hour to reply to this post. MTF is hosed.

Ok, I'll do it the messy way.

Of course you are comparing the LRA and Islamic Terrorism and as I said it is a specious comparison at best. No one was arm twisting with regard to the LRA for several reasons. One was it didn't have global implications. Another was that Kony was all over the place in his beliefs and doctrine and the bible and Christianity was only part of that. There were tribal issues at play (as is almost always the case in Africa). Following your thinking you would label the IRA as Christian Terrorists. Then again you would have to label the UDF as Christian Terrorists and then everything gets confused.

I suppose, if indeed Bush never used the term that there is a double standard at play here and without a doubt some are motivated by political reasons. The reality though, regardless of motivation it is a complete waste of time and effort, not to mention resulting in taking us off point (which I believe is the political motivation of some) when we make the discussion about semantics. What to label something rather than dealing with the real issue. If Bush's opponents had raised the issue of calling this Islamic Terrorism I would have agreed with them then and after more than a decade even more so now. I do agree with Bush (and Obama) that we are not at war with Islam itself but we are certainly at war with a sizable minority whose sole motivation are certain (and often twisted) tenants of that religion.

Then we have this................

"Why doesn't simply "terrorism" suffice? Because it doesn't echo your personal feelings toward Islam?"

Let's just label TJ a racist again. That'll show him. Never mind that he said this.....................

[COLOR=#222222][FONT="Arial"]

UncaRastus
11-14-2015, 02:47 PM
TJMAC, Bourne has been notified, and this problem has been passed on to the powers that be.

Rusty Jones
11-14-2015, 02:51 PM
Of course you are comparing the LRA and Islamic Terrorism and as I said it is a specious comparison at best. No one was arm twisting with regard to the LRA for several reasons. One was it didn't have global implications. Another was that Kony was all over the place in his beliefs and doctrine and the bible and Christianity was only part of that. There were tribal issues at play (as is almost always the case in Africa). Following your thinking you would label the IRA as Christian Terrorists. Then again you would have to label the UDF as Christian Terrorists and then everything gets confused.

Yeah, I'd say that the IRA are Christian terrorists. But the UDF? You'd need to clarify, because I'm thinking of Indian politics on that one and you're probably talking about something else. By the way, I'd also throw the KKK in there as well.


I suppose, if indeed Bush never used the term that there is a double standard at play here and without a doubt some are motivated by political reasons. The reality though, regardless of motivation it is a complete waste of time and effort, not to mention resulting in taking us off point (which I believe is the political motivation of some) when we make the discussion about semantics. What to label something rather than dealing with the real issue.

Wait a sec... were you the one, along with garhkal, expressing disappointment with Obama for not saying "Islamic terrorism?" Why are you now complaining about semantics at the expense of dealing with the real issue?


If Bush's opponents had raised the issue of calling this Islamic Terrorism I would have agreed with them then and after more than a decade even more so now. I do agree with Bush (and Obama) that we are not at war with Islam itself but we are certainly at war with a sizable minority whose sole motivation are certain (and often twisted) tenants of that religion.

Then we have this................

"Why doesn't simply "terrorism" suffice? Because it doesn't echo your personal feelings toward Islam?"

Let's just label TJ a racist again. That'll show him. Never mind that he said this.....................

Okay, then answer the question that I asked: Why is it so important to you that the word "Islamic" be placed in front of the word "terrorism?"

sandsjames
11-14-2015, 03:19 PM
Yeah, I'd say that the IRA are Christian terrorists. But the UDF? You'd need to clarify, because I'm thinking of Indian politics on that one and you're probably talking about something else. By the way, I'd also throw the KKK in there as well. Agree completely with both of these as being Christian terrorist groups. You can even break it down more for the IRA to a specific branch of Christianity.








Okay, then answer the question that I asked: Why is it so important to you that the word "Islamic" be placed in front of the word "terrorism?" I think it's important because it identifies the enemy. This isn't a one time terrorist attack. This is sustained and widespread. In Europe during WWII we identified the enemy as Nazi's. Was everyone fighting against us a Nazi? I'm sure they weren't. But it gave us an "opponent" and a focus. It's labeled as "Islamic" because those are currently the fundamentalist views we are fighting against.

UncaRastus
11-14-2015, 03:22 PM
I believe the UDF referred to was the Ulster Defense Force, which fought against the IRA.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 03:36 PM
Yeah, I'd say that the IRA are Christian terrorists. But the UDF? You'd need to clarify, because I'm thinking of Indian politics on that one and you're probably talking about something else. By the way, I'd also throw the KKK in there as well.



Wait a sec... were you the one, along with garhkal, expressing disappointment with Obama for not saying "Islamic terrorism?" Why are you now complaining about semantics at the expense of dealing with the real issue?



Okay, then answer the question that I asked: Why is it so important to you that the word "Islamic" be placed in front of the word "terrorism?"

Ulster Defence Force.............surely you could have Googled that and found a contextually relevant entry.

I am complaining (do you REALLY not see this.....I think you do) because we are dealing with semantics instead of dealing with the real issue.

Ok, since you would lump the IRA as Christian Terrorist group I can understand the faulty logic that leads you to label the LRA as the same. Got it. Let's start a trend.....pass this on to everyone in DC, let's just call them a Christian Terrorist group. Next.

Let's look at your question from another angle. Given the tremendous time and effort that continues to go into explain why the TERM can't be used, why is so important NOT to put the word in front of the word terrorism.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 03:40 PM
Agree completely with both of these as being Christian terrorist groups. You can even break it down more for the IRA to a specific branch of Christianity.

..............and the UDF as another branch. You meant to include them as well right?

Rusty Jones
11-14-2015, 03:50 PM
Ulster Defence Force.............surely you could have Googled that and found a contextually relevant entry.

I am complaining (do you REALLY not see this.....I think you do) because we are dealing with semantics instead of dealing with the real issue.

Then, I ask again, why do you care so much about someone putting the word "Islamic" in front of "terrorism?" Surely, if you cared about the "real issue" you could always fall back on praising Putin at Obama's expense or something like that. But... you're participating in the very thing that you're complaining about.


Ok, since you would lump the IRA as Christian Terrorist group I can understand the faulty logic that leads you to label the LRA as the same. Got it. Let's start a trend.....pass this on to everyone in DC, let's just call them a Christian Terrorist group. Next.

Man, are we about to argue semantics on the word "terrorist?"


Let's look at your question from another angle. Given the tremendous time and effort that continues to go into explain why the TERM can't be used, why is so important NOT to put the word in front of the word terrorism.

I don't think it's important, personally. From what I'm seeing, there are people who want the word and inserted, and there are people who don't give a fuck.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 04:16 PM
Then, I ask again, why do you care so much about someone putting the word "Islamic" in front of "terrorism?" Surely, if you cared about the "real issue" you could always fall back on praising Putin at Obama's expense or something like that. But... you're participating in the very thing that you're complaining about.



Man, are we about to argue semantics on the word "terrorist?"



I don't think it's important, personally. From what I'm seeing, there are people who want the word and inserted, and there are people who don't give a fuck.


I do agree we are participating in exactly the thing I hate but to be more specific I get pissed when people who have better things to do, like the President, Congress and cabinet officials do it.

So you don't think it's important? How many posts before this one that made it seem like you really do care?

sandsjames
11-14-2015, 05:04 PM
..............and the UDF as another branch. You meant to include them as well right?

I didn't mean to include them. If I had meant to than I would have. But, yes, they also fall into the category. Any group that attacks others based on their religious beliefs are an extremist/terrorist group related to that religion. So, in Ireland and Northern Ireland you have two Christian terrorist groups. I didn't realize the omission of UDF/UDA would upset you so much.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-14-2015, 06:57 PM
I didn't mean to include them. If I had meant to than I would have. But, yes, they also fall into the category. Any group that attacks others based on their religious beliefs are an extremist/terrorist group related to that religion. So, in Ireland and Northern Ireland you have two Christian terrorist groups. I didn't realize the omission of UDF/UDA would upset you so much.

Now you are in hot water with me for calling the Ulstermen terrorists.

They are just brave young lads trying to defend their neighborhoods from IRA aggression.

sandsjames
11-14-2015, 07:13 PM
Now you are in hot water with me for calling the Ulstermen terrorists.

They are just brave young lads trying to defend their neighborhoods from IRA aggression.

Absolutely. I was just appeasing TJ with my other response. Most people know that I'm an Ulster guy. That was obvious by not mentioning them, and 1000 other groups, in my previous post.

Rusty Jones
11-14-2015, 07:18 PM
I do agree we are participating in exactly the thing I hate but to be more specific I get pissed when people who have better things to do, like the President, Congress and cabinet officials do it.

So you don't think it's important? How many posts before this one that made it seem like you really do care?

I never made an affirmative statement that the word "Islamic" shouldn't be inserted. I'm just curious as to why people want it so bad, and why not inserting it makes someone an asshole.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-14-2015, 08:07 PM
I never made an affirmative statement that the word "Islamic" shouldn't be inserted. I'm just curious as to why people want it so bad, and why not inserting it makes someone an asshole.

I'd like to hear an answer to that too.

sandsjames
11-14-2015, 08:26 PM
I'm just curious as to why people want it so bad, and why not inserting it makes someone an asshole.I think it has to do with the perceived reason for not using the word than anything else.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 09:21 PM
I think it has to do with the perceived reason for not using the word than anything else.

That's probably a big part of it.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 09:27 PM
I never made an affirmative statement that the word "Islamic" shouldn't be inserted. I'm just curious as to why people want it so bad, and why not inserting it makes someone an asshole.

Well I never called anyone an asshole and you are ignoring my point (again, again, again)

It is the time, effort and distraction from the real issue that upsets me.

Let's look at another issue where semantics has been used to distract from the actual and real issue.

Illegal Alien..........that term is a perfectly accurate term for someone who is not a US citizen (in legal US language, an alien) and they did not enter the county legally, thus they entered illegally.

How much frapping angst is expended on that nonsense.

With Islamic Terrorism it is an even bigger problem because these people are in many ways, winning the public relations war, at least amongst their own people. A people that numbers over 1 and a half billion.

One thing I absolutely believe and that is you don't really give a shit about the term or whether or not its used but I don't believe for a second that it is simply puzzlement over the furor that has been raised.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 09:31 PM
I didn't mean to include them. If I had meant to than I would have. But, yes, they also fall into the category. Any group that attacks others based on their religious beliefs are an extremist/terrorist group related to that religion. So, in Ireland and Northern Ireland you have two Christian terrorist groups. I didn't realize the omission of UDF/UDA would upset you so much.

You have a very strange view of when and what makes me 'upset'.

You said both were Christian Terrorist groups but then mentioned only the IRA as being a 'specific branch of Christianity'. That was puzzling.

Did you really think I was upset or is there something else?

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 09:33 PM
Absolutely. I was just appeasing TJ with my other response. Most people know that I'm an Ulster guy. That was obvious by not mentioning them, and 1000 other groups, in my previous post.

What were the other 998 groups being discussed?
You've got me puzzled again

Absinthe Anecdote
11-14-2015, 09:53 PM
What were the other 998 groups being discussed?
You've got me puzzled again

Catch a fricking clue.

sandsjames
11-14-2015, 09:54 PM
You have a very strange view of when and what makes me 'upset'.

You said both were Christian Terrorist groups but then mentioned only the IRA as being a 'specific branch of Christianity'. That was puzzling.

Did you really think I was upset or is there something else?I also didn't mention the LRA, Aryan Nations, or the CIM. Doesn't mean I don't believe they are Christian terrorist groups.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 10:14 PM
I also didn't mention the LRA, Aryan Nations, or the CIM. Doesn't mean I don't believe they are Christian terrorist groups.

But in reference to your post in which you quoted my post about the IRA and UDF you only mentioned the IRA. The other groups you just mentioned weren't discussed in those posts. Hence why I was puzzled.

AA: Aryan Nations and CIM are two..........996 to go. Well I guess we need to count the LRA so 995 to go.

Okay just so people don't get upset, that seems to be going around, I am just kidding guys.

TJMAC77SP
11-14-2015, 10:15 PM
Catch a fricking clue.

Now see, I would say this post is indicative of being upset.

Rainmaker
11-15-2015, 01:17 AM
What the Hell is wrong with the cut and paste functions in the MTF?!?!

TJ, you need to type illuminati.com backwards into your browser to find out if you've been hacked by "Anonymous".

Just to make it easy, Rainmaker'll type it for you here.

www.itanimulli.com

UncaRastus
11-15-2015, 02:52 AM
Rainmaker, I will get you for that, I swear ...

I would advise everyone to click on the link in Rainmakers last post. It is amazing!

garhkal
11-15-2015, 02:55 AM
Garhkal started this thread and, as you just admitted here, you completely agree with him. By the way, I don't think Obama has ever said that we're not seeing Islamaic terrorism. Your gripe is over him not using a word. A word that, unless you're a Cruz or Jindal supporter, your candidate has never said himself.

of you check rusty, it was started by TJMA. Not me.
As far as the other candidates and why i am not calling THEM out on it, its cause they are not actually in the office yet, unlike Obama (and yes i did call bush on his lack of willingness to label them islamic terrorists back in the day).

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 11:53 AM
I also didn't mention the LRA, Aryan Nations, or the CIM. Doesn't mean I don't believe they are Christian terrorist groups.

I can't think of what CIM stands for. But Aryan Nation wouldn't be considered a Christian terrorist group, since most members worship Norse gods. They're not a part of mainstream Asatru, but some branch of Odinism.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 12:00 PM
of you check rusty, it was started by TJMA. Not me.
As far as the other candidates and why i am not calling THEM out on it, its cause they are not actually in the office yet, unlike Obama (and yes i did call bush on his lack of willingness to label them islamic terrorists back in the day).

...and I'm gonna call bullshit on this one. I think it's easy for you to claim that you called Bush on it, since no one here can prove that you didn't. Do you believe that Obama won't do it, simply because he's a liberal and only a liberal won't do it? Because that's the vibe I'm getting from you.

As for the candidates, why do you only ask it of them AFTER they assume office? Isn't the sole purpose of campaigning for the candidates to tell the people what they want to hear?

Since Ted Cruz is the top contender to have said "Islamic terrorism," is he the man who has your vote so far?

sandsjames
11-15-2015, 12:25 PM
I can't think of what CIM stands for. But Aryan Nation wouldn't be considered a Christian terrorist group, since most members worship Norse gods. They're not a part of mainstream Asatru, but some branch of Odinism.

There are several splinter groups of the Aryan Nation that I'm finding. The Aryan Nation Revival is a Christian splinter. The CIM is the Christian Identity Movement with the Aryan Nation and several others are splinter groups of.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-15-2015, 12:38 PM
I can't think of what CIM stands for. But Aryan Nation wouldn't be considered a Christian terrorist group, since most members worship Norse gods. They're not a part of mainstream Asatru, but some branch of Odinism.

Are you thinking of the Aryan Brotherhood? They are primarily a prison gang with connections to gangs on the outside and are largely focused on drug distribution networks and the politics of "prisoner life."

I don't think they are overly religious. I've never heard of them worshiping Norse gods, but I wouldn't be surprised.

I do know they use a variety Celtic and Norse symbology in their tattoos.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 12:51 PM
Are you thinking of the Aryan Brotherhood?

That can get kinda tricky sometimes. I believe there's another group called the Aryan Circle, which is a rival gang that often gets confused with Aryan Brotherhood or lumped in with them (I freely admit that I don't know the difference in ideologies between the two, since they're probably of little importance to anyone who's not a member). Then there's all of the various Neo-Nazi groups that are hardly distinguishable from the AB or AC, much less each other....

sandsjames
11-15-2015, 01:25 PM
http://aattp.org/here-are-8-christian-terrorist-organizations-that-equal-isis/

As repulsive as these groups are, they do not equate to ISIS, but they are radical Christian terrorist groups.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-15-2015, 02:25 PM
Can we at long last........call it Islamic Terrorism?

I realize it is a bit too soon (meaning that claimed credit hasn't been confirmed) but I am fairly comfortable climbing out on that limb.

I imagine every French citizen has no problem with the label.

What is wrong with calling it terrorism?

Why does the Islamic lable have to be in front of it?

I am no friend of any silly religion, but I understand why politicians and government officials have to parse their words.

I can tell you why government officials and anyone else with a good public relations sense tries to be precise in their wording when talking about terrorism.

They don't want to offend the massive number of Islamic worshippers who aren't terrorists.

It is as plain and simple as that. Public relations 101, don't piss off people unnecessarily with imprecise language.

Calling it a terrorist attack until the group is identified makes a lot of sense to me. After it has been attributed to a particular group, like ISIS, then saying it was an ISIS attack makes even more sense.

Those attacks were carried out by ISIS, an Islamic terrorist organization, true. However, why are you insisting that the generic Islamic label be used to refer it?

Why would you bash Obama or any other politician for not throwing the term Islamic terrorism around loosely?

Public officials with common sense don't piss off large groups of people unnecessarily.

Why can't you see that?

MikeKerriii
11-15-2015, 02:25 PM
A nation state is a country centered around a particular ethnic group. "American" is a nationality. It means you're a citizen of the US. However, "American" is not an ethnicity. "French" is.

I gather you have never met anyone from France, have no knowledge of French History, or any gasp of the multiple ethnic groups that have always made up France.

MikeKerriii
11-15-2015, 02:27 PM
.........call it Islamic Terrorism?

I realize it is a bit too soon (meaning that claimed credit hasn't been confirmed) but I am fairly comfortable climbing out on that limb.

I imagine every French citizen has no problem with the label.

Are you willing to call the Atlanta Olympic bombing a act of Christian terrorism?

MikeKerriii
11-15-2015, 02:32 PM
I never made an affirmative statement that the word "Islamic" shouldn't be inserted. I'm just curious as to why people want it so bad, and why not inserting it makes someone an asshole.

The want support for thier religious bigotry, Why else would they want the word included?

sandsjames
11-15-2015, 02:41 PM
Public officials with common sense don't piss off large groups of people unnecessarily.

Why can't you see that?Well, they don't piss of large groups, other than 50% of the American population. What's frustrating is that we know that they know it's Islamic terrorism, yet PC, or public relations as you call it, changes their words. Does it make a difference if they use the word Islamic or not? Not really. What does matter is that they think it makes a difference if they don't us it.

sandsjames
11-15-2015, 02:45 PM
The want support for thier religious bigotry, Why else would they want the word included? How about because the terrorists in these cases ALL claim Islam as their religion, as well as their reason for fighting.

Why don't you have the same issue when it's reported that a WHITE cop shoots a BLACK man? Is it also bigoted for it to be reported that way? The group is identified because it gives a narrative to the situation.

OH, and the name of the terrorist group has the word ISLAMIC in it.

Now, a better question would be "Is ISIS a terrorist group or are they an organized military". They appear to be more of an organized military, which would get rid of the word terrorism altogether.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 02:46 PM
I gather you have never met anyone from France, have no knowledge of French History, or any gasp of the multiple ethnic groups that have always made up France.I've been to Paris, Heyeres, Toulon, Marseille and... if you want to include it, Brussels.

You were saying?

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 02:57 PM
There really is no point in bringing up the various subgroups in France. They're still ethnically French. That's like saying that the Volga aren't ethnic Germans or that either the Sephardic or Ashkenazi aren't ethic Jews.

What you just did was make a lame attempt to look intelligent at my expense. Fuck with me if you want to, I've got something for you.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 03:14 PM
Well, Mike... looks like the "gods" are in your favor. They deleted my post to save you from being humiliated.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-15-2015, 03:41 PM
Well, they don't piss of large groups, other than 50% of the American population. What's frustrating is that we know that they know it's Islamic terrorism, yet PC, or public relations as you call it, changes their words. Does it make a difference if they use the word Islamic or not? Not really. What does matter is that they think it makes a difference if they don't us it.

So because you and a few other million people who didn't graduate from college can't understand the dynamics of public relations, you want our government officials to piss off 1.5 billion people scattered across the globe?

Some of those same Islamic people that we risk offending with such imprecise language are needed as allies to fight ISIS.

You do realize that don't you?

What is the big deal calling it terrorism until the group has been identified? When ISIS has been identified, then they can call it an ISIS attack.

Why should any politician put themselves in an unfavorable situation just because you prefer the term Islamic terrorism?

I can understand why a garhkal or a Rainmaker rants and raves about what they see as political correctness when pounding cheap beer at the American Legion.

However, there is a political reality that has more than a single layer to it.

Public officials have to deal with these realities, and they tend to choose language that isn't inflammatory and makes their jobs more difficult.

Tell me what would have been gained by a U.S. official calling the Paris attacks Islamic terrorism in the first hour after it happened?

Regardless of what you and your buddies think, the smart move is to wait until you know what is going on.

On a global stage, the reality is that it makes sense to avoid the use of Islamic terrorism.

You are looking at this issue from inside your Christian bubble. Just as there are non-terrorists who are looking at it from inside their Islamic bubbles.

If I could, I'd burst both bubbles because they cause irrational thinking and make things like political correctness even more necessary.

Yes, believe it or not, there are politicians who have to be politically correct because of your Christian beliefs.

sandsjames
11-15-2015, 03:52 PM
So because you and a few other million people who didn't graduate from college can't understand the dynamics of public relations, you want our government officials to piss off 1.5 billion people scattered across the globe? I graduated from college twice. Or are you, as a SNCO, saying that a CCAF isn't a real degree and isn't important?


Some of those same Islamic people that we risk offending with such imprecise language are needed as allies to fight ISIS.

You do realize that don't you? I do realize that. Some of the white cops that don't shoot black men will be needed to stop the institutionalized racism in the police department, yet it's still pointed out that they are white cops.


What is the big deal calling it terrorism until the group has been identified? When ISIS has been identified, then they can call it an ISIS attack. And I'm ok with that. I'm at the point where I don't see them as a terrorist group anymore than I see the Americans during the revolution as a terrorist group.


Why should any politician put themselves in an unfavorable situation just because you prefer the term Islamic terrorism? Unfavorable with who?


I can understand why a @garkhal or a Rainmaker rants and raves about what they see as political correctness when pounding cheap beer at the American Legion.

However, there is a political reality that has more than a single layer to it.

Public officials have to deal with these realities, and they tend to choose language that isn't inflammatory and makes their jobs more difficult. I think Donald Trump's poll numbers would disagree.


Tell me what would have been gained by a U.S. official calling the Paris attacks Islamic terrorism in the first hour after it happened?I'm pretty sure I ever said that should have happened. Maybe you can show me where I did. I do know that 24 hours after it happened, the Democrats at the debate weren't willing to do so.


Regardless of what you and your buddies think, the smart move is to wait until you know what is going on. I agree, unless you can show me where I said otherwise.


On a global stage, the reality is that it makes sense to avoid the use of Islamic terrorism. How so? Are they gonna hate us less?


You are looking at this issue from inside your Christian bubble. Just as there are non-terrorists who are looking at it from inside their Islamic bubbles. I think you're jumping to conclusions based on statements that I haven't made. Please read all the posts. I simply stated facts. The same facts you did, that the term is avoided due to political correctness (you called it PR, same thing). I even stated that it isn't even really terrorism anymore. I stated that 50% of the people (or so)(Conservatives) are "offended" by the avoidance of the term "Islamic" used with terrorism. Are any of these things I've stated incorrect?


If I could, I'd burst both bubbles because they cause irrational thinking and make things like political correctness even more necessary. You mean Public Relations. That's awesome that there's even a PC term for PC now.


Yes, believe it or not, there are politicians who have to be politically correct because of your Christian beliefs.No, they don't have to. They feel they have to, but they really don't. Aren't you glad I'm back so you can go back to your one bag of tricks?

Mjölnir
11-15-2015, 04:05 PM
Well, Mike... looks like the "gods" are in your favor. They deleted my post to save you from being humiliated.

There are two deleted posts (one at 1044 and one at 1057.) The history has you having deleted them from your account.

Would you like me to restore one or both?

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 04:19 PM
There are two deleted posts (one at 1044 and one at 1057.) The history has you having deleted them from your account.

Would you like me to restore one or both?

The last one, please.

TJMAC77SP
11-15-2015, 04:28 PM
What is wrong with calling it terrorism?

Why does the Islamic lable have to be in front of it?

I am no friend of any silly religion, but I understand why politicians and government officials have to parse their words.

I can tell you why government officials and anyone else with a good public relations sense tries to be precise in their wording when talking about terrorism.

They don't want to offend the massive number of Islamic worshippers who aren't terrorists.

It is as plain and simple as that. Public relations 101, don't piss off people unnecessarily with imprecise language.

Calling it a terrorist attack until the group is identified makes a lot of sense to me. After it has been attributed to a particular group, like ISIS, then saying it was an ISIS attack makes even more sense.

Those attacks were carried out by ISIS, an Islamic terrorist organization, true. However, why are you insisting that the generic Islamic label be used to refer it?

Why would you bash Obama or any other politician for not throwing the term Islamic terrorism around loosely?

Public officials with common sense don't piss off large groups of people unnecessarily.

Why can't you see that?

I do see it and I actually agree with you on many points. I major gripe is the efforts politicians go through to avoid offending anyone (imagine that word in all caps...I know you hate that). It is silly to think you can do that and not appear insincere. I think that in part is why Trump is so popular. So many people are fed up and sick and tired of the semantically centered back and forth and 'political correctness' for lack of another term. Unfortunately Trump is at the other end of the spectrum. He purposely chooses inflammatory words for their effect alone, not to impart any cogent statement or position (or plan).

Truth is this thread has gone down the rabbit hole as I knew it would. I suppose that was childish of me. I really was angry in anticipating the tap dancing we would see (like Hillary's indirect answer to a direct question) while watching the coverage Friday night but I also knew that starting the thread would result in some very predictable posts by certain people, and it did. For that I do have some small amount of regret.

I believe that most Muslims (meaning the moderate ones who do not support this horrible use of their religion) don't really care if it is called Islamic Terrorism as long as the actions taken don't appear to target them all. If indeed those Muslims would be offended I would question whether or not they really want to see this horror to end.

TJMAC77SP
11-15-2015, 04:33 PM
Are you willing to call the Atlanta Olympic bombing a act of Christian terrorism?

In the sense that Rudolph did it as an act against abortion, and he feels that abortion is murder based on his Christian beliefs, I suppose I would (never did figure out how the act corresponds to the movement but whatever).

What now?

TJMAC77SP
11-15-2015, 04:34 PM
I gather you have never met anyone from France, have no knowledge of French History, or any gasp of the multiple ethnic groups that have always made up France.

Hey, what do you know, a post by you I agree with.

It won't last.

TJMAC77SP
11-15-2015, 04:38 PM
The want support for thier religious bigotry, Why else would they want the word included?

And here you go...........the agreement ends.

While it is most certainly true that some number of people who insist on the use of the term Islamic Terrorism are doing so out of 'religious bigotry' to state that all are motivated by that (as you have done here) is simply indicative of your parochial agenda. That brush you insist on wielding is way too big for any credible discussion.

TJMAC77SP
11-15-2015, 04:41 PM
I've been to Paris, Heyeres, Toulon, Marseille and... if you want to include it, Brussels.

You were saying?

What he was saying (and me prior to that) is that you have demonstrated ZERO knowledge of France, her demographics or her modern culture

TJMAC77SP
11-15-2015, 04:42 PM
The last one, please.

Why not both?

MikeKerriii
11-15-2015, 05:07 PM
I've been to Paris, Heyeres, Toulon, Marseille and... if you want to include it, Brussels.

You were saying?
They you have not been payng much attention, the French have not be ethnically pure since Charlemagne ruled.

MikeKerriii
11-15-2015, 05:10 PM
How about because the terrorists in these cases ALL claim Islam as their religion, as well as their reason for fighting.

Why don't you have the same issue when it's reported that a WHITE cop shoots a BLACK man? Is it also bigoted for it to be reported that way? The group is identified because it gives a narrative to the situation.

OH, and the name of the terrorist group has the word ISLAMIC in it.

Now, a better question would be "Is ISIS a terrorist group or are they an organized military". They appear to be more of an organized military, which would get rid of the word terrorism altogether.

So Grammar is worth pissing of even more Muslims and feeding the idiot anti-Muslim bigots in the US ?

sandsjames
11-15-2015, 05:29 PM
So Grammar is worth pissing of even more Muslims and feeding the idiot anti-Muslim bigots in the US ?You really think the anti-Muslim bigots need a reason? And apparently grammar is worth pissing off a large amount of the American population by not using the word.

I don't care either way. As I said, I wouldn't even label them a terrorist group anymore. They are an organized army.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 05:48 PM
What he was saying (and me prior to that) is that you have demonstrated ZERO knowledge of France, her demographics or her modern culture

Which is a load of horseshit. He's trying to look intelligent at my expense, something he's failed to do multiple times with everyone else. Now that I'm back, it looks like he's trying his hand with me.

I'm not concerning myself with the various subgroups of France. By Mike's logic, the Volga aren't ethnic Germans, and only the Ashkenazi or Sephardic Jews can lay claim to being ethnic Jews. Or... maybe he knows how faulty this logic is, and was trying to get at me for not mentioning various groups of ethnic French, such as Walloons, Bretons, etc.

Mike can fuck with me if he wants to. I've got something for him.

MikeKerriii
11-15-2015, 05:52 PM
And here you go...........the agreement ends.

While it is most certainly true that some number of people who insist on the use of the term Islamic Terrorism are doing so out of 'religious bigotry' to state that all are motivated by that (as you have done here) is simply indicative of your parochial agenda. That brush you insist on wielding is way too big for any credible discussion.
The Use of the term supports folks like Pam Gellar and Isis, the fanatics on both sides gain from the use of the word since they want to make this into a war between all of Islam and the West. the use of the term serves no diplomatic purpose and only a very shaky political one, so why should US official hurt us by using it, what do we gain to offset the losses? what make enemies , or even push people that way, if you don't have to?

There are pragmatic reasons not to use the term and there are only political reasons to use the term. It has been turned into a partisan issue and should not be one.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 05:53 PM
Why not both?

Surely, you can grasp that I deleted the first on purpose and the second one by accident, no? You fancy yourself an intelligent guy, do you not?

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 05:54 PM
They you have not been payng much attention, the French have not be ethnically pure since Charlemagne ruled.

Tell me more about the observations you've made the last time you were in France.

MikeKerriii
11-15-2015, 05:55 PM
In the sense that Rudolph did it as an act against abortion, and he feels that abortion is murder based on his Christian beliefs, I suppose I would (never did figure out how the act corresponds to the movement but whatever).

What now? Some folks are not honest enough to admit that there are Christian terrorists, I am happy to see that you are not one of them.

MikeKerriii
11-15-2015, 05:56 PM
Which is a load of horseshit. He's trying to look intelligent at my expense, something he's failed to do multiple times with everyone else. Now that I'm back, it looks like he's trying his hand with me.

I'm not concerning myself with the various subgroups of France. By Mike's logic, the Volga aren't ethnic Germans, and only the Ashkenazi or Sephardic Jews can lay claim to being ethnic Jews. Or... maybe he knows how faulty this logic is, and was trying to get at me for not mentioning various groups of ethnic French, such as Walloons, Bretons, etc.

Mike can fuck with me if he wants to. I've got something for him.

In your own post you just proved my point, thanks.

Rainmaker
11-15-2015, 05:58 PM
Which is a load of horseshit.

I'm not concerning myself with the various subgroups of France. By Mike's logic, the Volga aren't ethnic Germans, and only the Ashkenazi or Sephardic Jews can lay claim to being ethnic Jews. Or... maybe he knows how faulty this logic is,

DING DING DING DING!!! WINNER WINNER CHiCKEN DINNER!!!

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 05:59 PM
In your own post you just proved my point, thanks.

No, chump. I merely showed what you were trying to do, and how you failed.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 06:06 PM
DING DING DING DING!!! WINNER WINNER CHiCKEN DINNER!!!

I don't think he's done yet. I think he's determined to be the one to walk out of this looking good. That's what he came at me like that in the first place.

Rainmaker
11-15-2015, 06:13 PM
I don't think he's done yet. I think he's determined to be the one to walk out of this looking good. That's what he came at me like that in the first place.

It's amazing how MikeKerriii can suddenly spell when he needs to.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 06:17 PM
It's amazing how Mike can suddenly spell when he needs to.

Looks like he has a fascination with reading up on medieval and early modern Europe, which is fine, but I was trying to illustrate a point about the difference between a nation state and non nation state in explaining why France might have more leeway in saying "Islamic terrorism" than we would... so what I said there really didn't need to be broken down further. Mike was seizing an opportunity to try to be right about something.

I'm starting to think he's a Pullinteeth alt account.

MikeKerriii
11-15-2015, 06:47 PM
Looks like he has a fascination with reading up on medieval and early modern Europe, which is fine, but I was trying to illustrate a point about the difference between a nation state and non nation state in explaining why France might have more leeway in saying "Islamic terrorism" than we would... so what I said there really didn't need to be broken down further. Mike was seizing an opportunity to try to be right about something.

I'm starting to think he's a Pullinteeth alt account.

Again you prove that you don't know what a nation states is, France is a nation state, So is the US. U You made a irrelevant distinction based on a faulty premise about France.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 07:10 PM
Again you prove that you don't know what a nation states is, France is a nation state, So is the US. U You made a irrelevant distinction based on a faulty premise about France.
...just like drunk man who got knocked the fuck out, and doesn't know when to take his "L" and stay down.

I explained what a nation state is. You didn't offer a definition, likely because you have nothing to counter with.

Again, American is not an ethnicity, nor is the US built around a particular ethnic group. You'll never hear of someone claiming to be part American, having American features, or saying shit like "don't piss him off, he's got that American blood in his veins."

However... you will hear that of someone claiming an ethnicity from a nation state. Like France.

TJMAC77SP
11-15-2015, 07:47 PM
Which is a load of horseshit. He's trying to look intelligent at my expense, something he's failed to do multiple times with everyone else. Now that I'm back, it looks like he's trying his hand with me.

I'm not concerning myself with the various subgroups of France. By Mike's logic, the Volga aren't ethnic Germans, and only the Ashkenazi or Sephardic Jews can lay claim to being ethnic Jews. Or... maybe he knows how faulty this logic is, and was trying to get at me for not mentioning various groups of ethnic French, such as Walloons, Bretons, etc.

Mike can fuck with me if he wants to. I've got something for him.

Oh for Christ's sake what do you 'have for him'?

You lamely and incorrectly tried to paint France as ethnically homogeneous in your first response in this thread and it has been shown in several posts that you are incorrect. Just move on from the false point.

TJMAC77SP
11-15-2015, 07:50 PM
The Use of the term supports folks like Pam Gellar and Isis, the fanatics on both sides gain from the use of the word since they want to make this into a war between all of Islam and the West. the use of the term serves no diplomatic purpose and only a very shaky political one, so why should US official hurt us by using it, what do we gain to offset the losses? what make enemies , or even push people that way, if you don't have to?

There are pragmatic reasons not to use the term and there are only political reasons to use the term. It has been turned into a partisan issue and should not be one.

It has and I contend that it is the continued and repeated justification for that which has turned it into a political issue. The one thing I haven't seen (I'm sure it exists but not in a volume which makes national news) is the opinion of moderate Muslims (not CAIR) on the issue and their explanation on why it shouldn't be used in light of the facts.

TJMAC77SP
11-15-2015, 07:52 PM
Surely, you can grasp that I deleted the first on purpose and the second one by accident, no? You fancy yourself an intelligent guy, do you not?

I do and that was not clear from your response to repost one and not the other.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 07:55 PM
Oh for Christ's sake what do you 'have for him'?

You lamely and incorrectly tried to paint France as ethnically homogeneous in your first response in this thread and it has been shown in several posts that you are incorrect. Just move on from the false point.

Did you not read where I said that estimates generally put France at 85% ethnic French? Did I EVER state that a country must be "ethnically homogenous" in order to be a nation state?

Jesus fucking Christ man, you'd have absolutely nothing were it not for the fact that you intentionally misread and/or misinterpret my posts.

I said a nation state is a country established around a particular ethic group. Not that it has to populated exclusively by that ethnic group. Damn...

TJMAC77SP
11-15-2015, 08:07 PM
...just like drunk man who got knocked the fuck out, and doesn't know when to take his "L" and stay down.

I explained what a nation state is. You didn't offer a definition, likely because you have nothing to counter with.

Again, American is not an ethnicity, nor is the US built around a particular ethnic group. You'll never hear of someone claiming to be part American, having American features, or saying shit like "don't piss him off, he's got that American blood in his veins."

However... you will hear that of someone claiming an ethnicity from a nation state. Like France.

It isn't your stating that France is a nation-state, it is in declaring that to be a relevant facet in their reaction vs the US for example.

It is also nearer the truth that France no longer fits the Nation-State profile which has been around for hundreds of years. Since they don't collect data on ethnic demographics it is difficult to assess but at least 21 percent of their population is Arab, black and Asian. The actual figures are probably a lot different since newborns with at least one foreign parent are around 27 percent.

Bottom line is your portrait of France is way off, period.

TJMAC77SP
11-15-2015, 08:14 PM
Did you not read where I said that estimates generally put France at 85% ethnic French? Did I EVER state that a country must be "ethnically homogenous" in order to be a nation state?

Jesus fucking Christ man, you'd have absolutely nothing were it not for the fact that you intentionally misread and/or misinterpret my posts.

I said a nation state is a country established around a particular ethic group. Not that it has to populated exclusively by that ethnic group. Damn...

Your bringing up the whole stupid and irrelevant issue of France's status as a nation-state was to counter my original post that the people of France probably wouldn't balk at the use of the term Islamic Terrorist.

My comment was tongue in cheek and referencing their obvious and deserved outrage over the cowardly attacks.

However, your citing this nation state is pure crap. It means absolutely nothing. More so given France's current ethnic diversity. The whole nation state discussion is nothing more that obfuscation.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 08:24 PM
It isn't your stating that France is a nation-state, it is in declaring that to be a relevant facet in their reaction vs the US for example.

It is also nearer the truth that France no longer fits the Nation-State profile which has been around for hundreds of years. Since they don't collect data on ethnic demographics it is difficult to assess but at least 21 percent of their population is Arab, black and Asian. The actual figures are probably a lot different since newborns with at least one foreign parent are around 27 percent.

Bottom line is your portrait of France is way off, period.

I got my numbers from Institut Montaigne. Where do you get yours?

I get your point, but that point is irrelevant.

Look at Hungary's stance on taking refugees. Hungary is a nation state built around the Magyars, but also has ethnic Germans and Roma. The only thing the world got mad about the was the woman who tripped the refugee. Sure, we said something about the president's stance, but we forgot about it a week or two later.

The world would be a lot less forgiving had the US or Canada adopted the same stance.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-15-2015, 08:30 PM
I graduated from college twice. Or are you, as a SNCO, saying that a CCAF isn't a real degree and isn't important?

I'm just jabbing you in the ribs about college. I didn't remember if you completed yours or not. The CCAF isn't much more than the 13th grade if you ask me, but it is better than nothing.




I do realize that. Some of the white cops that don't shoot black men will be needed to stop the institutionalized racism in the police department, yet it's still pointed out that they are white cops.

Are you sure that the recent police brutality cases are being reported as "white police" did this?

I think the headlines and most politicians just say police. In some of the recent cases of alleged police brutality the officers have been black.

The topic of the officer's race usually comes up, but I haven't been seeing it reported as white cops in the headlines. Nor I have seen or heard government officials talking in those terms either.


And I'm ok with that. I'm at the point where I don't see them as a terrorist group anymore than I see the Americans during the revolution as a terrorist group.

I'll pass on that one. Not too sure what your point is.


Unfavorable with who?

I think Donald Trump's poll numbers would disagree.

Trump isn't a government official. He is a candidate that is running as a non-establishment type.

If by some miracle he ever finds himself in elected office, he will instantly be part of the establishment. I would bet that he'd tone down his rhetoric as soon as he got into office, if not, then his job would be way harder than it should be if he insisted on using imprecise language.




I'm pretty sure I ever said that should have happened. Maybe you can show me where I did. I do know that 24 hours after it happened, the Democrats at the debate weren't willing to do so.

I agree, unless you can show me where I said otherwise.

Ok




How so? Are they gonna hate us less?

I was saying that loose language pisses off groups of people that aren't currently pissed at you.

If a government official isn't careful about what they say it causes problems that are easily avoided.

I wasn't claiming it would change the minds of Islamic people that are currently against us.

You appear to be viewing the entire Islamic world as having one point of view. It isn't like that.




I think you're jumping to conclusions based on statements that I haven't made. Please read all the posts. I simply stated facts. The same facts you did, that the term is avoided due to political correctness (you called it PR, same thing). I even stated that it isn't even really terrorism anymore. I stated that 50% of the people (or so)(Conservatives) are "offended" by the avoidance of the term "Islamic" used with terrorism. Are any of these things I've stated incorrect?

You mean Public Relations. That's awesome that there's even a PC term for PC now.

No, they don't have to. They feel they have to, but they really don't. Aren't you glad I'm back so you can go back to your one bag of tricks?

I was speaking in generalities in some of that and not attributing it all to you.

And yes, I do enjoy taking cheap shots at you.

I missed you immensely.

garhkal
11-15-2015, 08:31 PM
...and I'm gonna call bullshit on this one. I think it's easy for you to claim that you called Bush on it, since no one here can prove that you didn't. Do you believe that Obama won't do it, simply because he's a liberal and only a liberal won't do it? Because that's the vibe I'm getting from you.

As for the candidates, why do you only ask it of them AFTER they assume office? Isn't the sole purpose of campaigning for the candidates to tell the people what they want to hear?

Since Ted Cruz is the top contender to have said "Islamic terrorism," is he the man who has your vote so far?

Call BS all you want. It seems YOUR mind about what i am is already made up.

As to the Candidates, the reason i don't hold them to the same standard i do the POTUS< is that they (Currently) do not have the power to do anything about the situation.. OBAMA does.


What is wrong with calling it terrorism?

Why does the Islamic lable have to be in front of it?

Cause they are using their Religion as a basis FOR these actions/attacks.


They don't want to offend the massive number of Islamic worshippers who aren't terrorists.

And how is that whole "not wanting to offend, working out for the French?


Are you willing to call the Atlanta Olympic bombing a act of Christian terrorism?

No, since not ONE thing about that bombing has been linked to him being Christian. Heck checking the Wiki site for the info on Rudolph, it seems his attacks were cause of protesting Socialism..
So where in that is he being a 'christian terrorist'?


What is the big deal calling it terrorism until the group has been identified? When ISIS has been identified, then they can call it an ISIS attack.

Since they have already Claimed the attacks, can we now call it islamic terrorism?


You are looking at this issue from inside your Christian bubble. Just as there are non-terrorists who are looking at it from inside their Islamic bubbles.

How many times do i have to remind you i am AGNOSTIC not Christian.
So stop labeling me that way.


So Grammar is worth pissing of even more Muslims and feeding the idiot anti-Muslim bigots in the US ?

Hmm. So cause i hate islamic terrorists, and want them LABELED as such, cause they ARE using their religion as a precept for their acts, that makes me a bigot.. I guess then by a lot of your posts, you are an Anti-Chrisitan-bigot. Since it seems you have a hard on to slam anyone who seems to be Christian.

Mjölnir
11-15-2015, 08:35 PM
The last one, please.

Got it ... 1057

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 08:37 PM
Got it ... 1057

Forget it, no need now.

sandsjames
11-15-2015, 09:28 PM
And how is that whole "not wanting to offend, working out for the French? French aren't worried about offending them. They haven't let them wear religious clothing that covers their face for a few years now.

sandsjames
11-15-2015, 09:38 PM
I'm just jabbing you in the ribs about college. I didn't remember if you completed yours or not. The CCAF isn't much more than the 13th grade if you ask me, but it is better than nothing. No worries. It's pretty useless.




Are you sure that the recent police brutality cases are being reported as "white police" did this?Not completely sure, no.


I'll pass on that one. Not too sure what your point is.My point on this was simply that I don't feel that ISIS is a terrorist group anymore. They are an army. So calling it "Islamist terrorism" or something else is a moot point. We just hang on to the terrorist label because these attacks are not "conventional". The British said the same thing about us in the Revolutionary War because we didn't form up in big groups and march head on into the bullets, as was the traditional, honorable way at the time. So to continue to label ISIS as terrorists is the same as saying that we were terrorists in the Revolution.



Trump isn't a government official. He is a candidate that is running as a non-establishment type.

If by some miracle he ever finds himself in elected office, he will instantly be part of the establishment. I would bet that he'd tone down his rhetoric as soon as he got into office, if not, then his job would be way harder than it should be if he insisted on using imprecise language. Possibly, though he doesn't seem bright enough to have a filter. Just a couple days ago he called Iowan's stupid. Not terribly smart for one of the major election areas





I was saying that loose language pisses off groups of people that aren't currently pissed at you.

If a government official isn't careful about what they say it causes problems that are easily avoided.

I wasn't claiming it would change the minds of Islamic people that are currently against us. I agree with your premise. I just disagree that they should worry about that sort of thing.


You appear to be viewing the entire Islamic world as having one point of view. It isn't like that. Of course it's not. That's why using the phrase "Islamic Extremism" shouldn't bother them. It's a term related to extremists who use Islam as the basis for their war. Those who aren't extremist don't fall into that category.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 10:35 PM
Of course it's not. That's why using the phrase "Islamic Extremism" shouldn't bother them. It's a term related to extremists who use Islam as the basis for their war. Those who aren't extremist don't fall into that category.

I'm assuming you've been to the Middle East at least once and should know better than this.

Christianity is a more "casual" religion. One that can be turned off an on by its adherents. And that's not a bad thing; that's how Christianity is designed - you're a sinner who can't earn your way into Heaven, as it's freely given to those who believe. Great. This allows for people to point out evil things that some Christians do, such as the FLDS practice of forcing polygamous marriage on little girls or letting people die due to strict reliance on faith healing.

You know damn well that it's not that easy for Islam.

sandsjames
11-16-2015, 12:09 AM
I'm assuming you've been to the Middle East at least once and should know better than this.

Christianity is a more "casual" religion. One that can be turned off an on by its adherents. And that's not a bad thing; that's how Christianity is designed - you're a sinner who can't earn your way into Heaven, as it's freely given to those who believe. Great. This allows for people to point out evil things that some Christians do, such as the FLDS practice of forcing polygamous marriage on little girls or letting people die due to strict reliance on faith healing.

You know damn well that it's not that easy for Islam.

This is very true. It's hard to grasp the thoughts of a civilization that's 200 years behind.

TJMAC77SP
11-16-2015, 02:47 AM
I got my numbers from Institut Montaigne. Where do you get yours?

I get your point, but that point is irrelevant.

Look at Hungary's stance on taking refugees. Hungary is a nation state built around the Magyars, but also has ethnic Germans and Roma. The only thing the world got mad about the was the woman who tripped the refugee. Sure, we said something about the president's stance, but we forgot about it a week or two later.

The world would be a lot less forgiving had the US or Canada adopted the same stance.

World Population Review

BTW could you cite the URL for the English language page of the Institut Montaigne.

I really had a laugh at you telling me that my point was irrelevant. Seriously, it was laughable.

To add to the humor you add more irrelevant drivel with the mentioning of Hungary.

For the sake of the poor MTF readers who don't feel like slogging through 10 pages to figure out what the Hell is being discussed here...

My original post in the thread....................


.........callit Islamic Terrorism?

I realize it is a bit too soon (meaning that claimed credit hasn't beenconfirmed) but I am fairly comfortable climbing out on that limb.

I imagine every French citizen has no problem with the label.


And your reply..............


Unlike the US, France is a nation state. They don't get to be held to same standard.

What the Hell do 'standards' have to do with it.

MikeKerriii
11-16-2015, 04:11 AM
No, since not ONE thing about that bombing has been linked to him being Christian. Heck checking the Wiki site for the info on Rudolph, it seems his attacks were cause of protesting Socialism..
So where in that is he being a 'christian terrorist'? He was a member of the Cristian nut-bag fringe of f the anti-abortion movement when he committed the attack, a "Christian"Movement that repeatedly encouraged and admired terrorist attacks within the US. Where did you get the socialist excuse from.

Remember When tiller was murdered and the fringe, all professing to be Christian, came out saying how justified that terrorist attack was?

Rusty Jones
11-16-2015, 11:23 AM
World Population Review

BTW could you cite the URL for the English language page of the Institut Montaigne.

I really had a laugh at you telling me that my point was irrelevant. Seriously, it was laughable.

To add to the humor you add more irrelevant drivel with the mentioning of Hungary.

For the sake of the poor MTF readers who don't feel like slogging through 10 pages to figure out what the Hell is being discussed here...

My original post in the thread....................




And your reply..............



What the Hell do 'standards' have to do with it.

I didn't get it off the website, but off of information that I was reviewing while I was stuck at the airport in Marseille for 12 hours.

Oh, by the way, your point was irrelevant and the real joke is you keep insisting that it's not. Furthermore, you wants to dismiss Hungary because it strengthens what I'm saying.

Sorry, chump... your argument is lame, and it's a joke. Looks like you're simply doing what Mike is doing: trying to be right about something.

TJMAC77SP
11-16-2015, 12:17 PM
I didn't get it off the website, but off of information that I was reviewing while I was stuck at the airport in Marseille for 12 hours.

Oh, by the way, your point was irrelevant and the real joke is you keep insisting that it's not. Furthermore, you wants to dismiss Hungary because it strengthens what I'm saying.

Sorry, chump... your argument is lame, and it's a joke. Looks like you're simply doing what Mike is doing: trying to be right about something.

Were there population pamphlets from the Institut Montaigne in the airport? You remember that figure or did you keep the pamphlet?

What am I attempting to be right about? That everyone in France would be happy to call the attacks on Friday Islamic Terrorism or that your citing their being a 'nation-state' is so fucking irrelevant as to be a joke?

You are right (at last), I do think I am right on both those points.

Rusty Jones
11-16-2015, 12:55 PM
Were there population pamphlets from the Institut Montaigne in the airport? You remember that figure or did you keep the pamphlet?

A small booklet, possibly left behind by another passenger. This was in 2010, when I was on my way to go on emergency while I was on Med Cruise. I kept in my backpack for the rest of the cruise; about four months.


What am I attempting to be right about? That everyone in France would be happy to call the attacks on Friday Islamic Terrorism or that your citing their being a 'nation-state' is so fucking irrelevant as to be a joke?

In reference to the latter, the reason you don't want to talk about Hungary is because it disproves the latter. Let me say again: although the world had things to say about Hungary's refusal to take refugees, it was soon forgotten about. Had the US or Canada (two non-nation states) refused to take refugees, the world would have been on our asses until we gave in... and, even then, we'd still continue to take some admonishment afterwards.

You know this, and I know this. But you don't want to talk about THAT, do you?


You are right (at last), I do think I am right on both those points.

Shocker.

Rainmaker
11-16-2015, 06:41 PM
French aren't worried about offending them. They haven't let them wear religious clothing that covers their face for a few years now.

And yet, It didn't stop their turncoat Socialist Politicians from meeting their Syrian Refugee quota (even after Charlie Hebdo attacks, the foiled Paris train Attack and repeated reports for months that Europe was being bombarded with "ISIS" terrorists posing as refugees).

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/03/germany-france-eu-refugee-quotas-migration-crisis

This makes about as much sense as 19 hijackers from Saudi Arabia attack the world trade center and we respond by attacking Iraq and Turning America into a virtual Police State, while at the same time ignoring the Millions of Migrants pouring in through the unsecured southern border.

Those responsible for leaving the barn door open should be tried for treason by the French People and strung up by their nuts on the Champs-Elysees.

TJMAC77SP
11-16-2015, 06:55 PM
A small booklet, possibly left behind by another passenger. This was in 2010, when I was on my way to go on emergency while I was on Med Cruise. I kept in my backpack for the rest of the cruise; about four months.



In reference to the latter, the reason you don't want to talk about Hungary is because it disproves the latter. Let me say again: although the world had things to say about Hungary's refusal to take refugees, it was soon forgotten about. Had the US or Canada (two non-nation states) refused to take refugees, the world would have been on our asses until we gave in... and, even then, we'd still continue to take some admonishment afterwards.

You know this, and I know this. But you don't want to talk about THAT, do you?



Shocker.

And you remembered exactly, including correct French spelling, the name of the organization which published it? Pretty amazing. I couldn't find any webpage in English for the institute. Surprised they print in English.

My point NEVER had anything to do with who is, was or wasn't accepting refugees. YOU raised that and it is completely irrelevant to my point.......which AGAIN was that I am sure that almost universally the French (and I would venture a guess anyone without another agenda to promote) would call what happened Friday night in Paris Islamic Terrorism. Period. Nothing about labels assigned to European countries hundreds of years ago and relevant mostly in Political Science classes in 2015. Nothing about a woman tripping a refugee. Nothing about Hungary. Nothing but what I said.

You raised the point I am sure to somehow dilute my post, which typically you failed at. You should really read more of what AA says, he does a much better job than you. I don't always agree with him but with the exception of his anti-Christian obsession he usually is cogent and articulate.

As to what I know, I have stated exactly that ad nauseum (although I am used to that with you 'chump')

Rusty Jones
11-16-2015, 07:32 PM
And you remembered exactly, including correct French spelling, the name of the organization which published it? Pretty amazing. I couldn't find any webpage in English for the institute. Surprised they print in English.

I Googled the spelling. I have a habit of doing that if I'm not sure of the correct spelling.


My point NEVER had anything to do with who is, was or wasn't accepting refugees. YOU raised that and it is completely irrelevant to my point.......which AGAIN was that I am sure that almost universally the French (and I would venture a guess anyone without another agenda to promote) would call what happened Friday night in Paris Islamic Terrorism. Period. Nothing about labels assigned to European countries hundreds of years ago and relevant mostly in Political Science classes in 2015. Nothing about a woman tripping a refugee. Nothing about Hungary. Nothing but what I said.

Jesus fucking Christ man, you're worse at keeping your eye on the bigger picture than WJ5! I brought up Hungary and the refugee situation to illustrate how nation states are able to get away with xenophobia more than non-nation states! You did say that France would have less of a problem saying "Islamic terrorism" than the US did, did you not?


You raised the point I am sure to somehow dilute my post, which typically you failed at. You should really read more of what AA says, he does a much better job than you. I don't always agree with him but with the exception of his anti-Christian obsession he usually is cogent and articulate.

AA uses tactics that are designed to get under your skin, that's different from what I'm doing. You dilute you own posts by intentionally misreading or refusing to grasp the things that I say.


As to what I know, I have stated exactly that ad nauseum (although I am used to that with you 'chump')

As to you what you know about what?

To date, I've heard of no one in the French government speaking in an official capacity saying "Islamic terrorism," have you? As to the whole "nation state" thing, the incident in Hungary illustrates my point. You've yet to offer a counter argument. Mostly because you're taking the easy way out and dismissing it.

So, again, what is it that you know?

sandsjames
11-16-2015, 08:42 PM
And yet, It didn't stop their turncoat Socialist Politicians from meeting their Syrian Refugee quota (even after Charlie Hebdo attacks, the foiled Paris train Attack and repeated reports for months that Europe was being bombarded with "ISIS" terrorists posing as refugees).

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/03/germany-france-eu-refugee-quotas-migration-crisis

This makes about as much sense as 19 hijackers from Saudi Arabia attack the world trade center and we respond by attacking Iraq and Turning America into a virtual Police State, while at the same time ignoring the Millions of Migrants pouring in through the unsecured southern border.

Those responsible for leaving the barn door open should be tried for treason by the French People and strung up by their nuts on the Champs-Elysees.

Oh yes, we are definitely close to being a police state. I mean, there are no anti-government propaganda sites I can go to. There are no forums I can speak my mind in without fear of being shot. Hold on just a sec, the Five-Os are knocking at my door.

Only someone who has no idea what it's like to live in a police state would pretend the think U.S. is on the verge of something remotely similar. Better do a service inspection on your security system, RM. I think they're coming to get you as we speak.

TJMAC77SP
11-16-2015, 10:41 PM
I Googled the spelling. I have a habit of doing that if I'm not sure of the correct spelling.



Jesus fucking Christ man, you're worse at keeping your eye on the bigger picture than WJ5! I brought up Hungary and the refugee situation to illustrate how nation states are able to get away with xenophobia more than non-nation states! You did say that France would have less of a problem saying "Islamic terrorism" than the US did, did you not?



AA uses tactics that are designed to get under your skin, that's different from what I'm doing. You dilute you own posts by intentionally misreading or refusing to grasp the things that I say.



As to you what you know about what?

To date, I've heard of no one in the French government speaking in an official capacity saying "Islamic terrorism," have you? As to the whole "nation state" thing, the incident in Hungary illustrates my point. You've yet to offer a counter argument. Mostly because you're taking the easy way out and dismissing it.

So, again, what is it that you know?

Why would I offer any kind of argument to a point which is completely irrelevant to anything I posted. Would you like me to argue that vanilla is the best flavor ice cream as well?

This whole Islamic Terrorism label debacle is pure bullshit. Not that I think you would actually conduct a credible test but I would suggest to anyone who wants to waste any time on this stupidity ask the next 10 regular people you come in contact with if these attacks like occurred in Paris are Islamic Terrorism. Don't parse the question just ask it exactly as that. I guaran-fucking-tee you that you will get the same answer from all of them. "FUCK YES IT IS !"

No we aren't at war with Islam and that phrase doesn't come close to saying that. It only even enters that universe when you actually couch your wording to achieve that narrative. I am perfectly comfortable labeling the Olympic Bombing as Christian Terrorism (although it is a pretty thin comparison to the current events, for the sake of brevity, I'll go along with it). I never viewed the thousands of LEOs who searched the Smokey Mountains for Rudolph as at war with Christianity (equally thin but I didn't raise the comparison after all)

Fucking nation-states !! Who the fuck are you kidding? Or attempting to kid. This isn't an ethnic issue at all. It only becomes that again when the wording is couched to do so. Anyone who knows anything, any fucking thing at all about Islam knows that it is practiced by many ethnic groups so whether any country is a nation state or not is AGAIN fucking bullshit. You attempted to steer the thread to your own, borrowed and unoriginal narrative. Again, who the fuck are you kidding?

Rainmaker
11-16-2015, 11:07 PM
Oh yes, we are definitely close to being a police state. I mean, there are no anti-government propaganda sites I can go to. There are no forums I can speak my mind in without fear of being shot. Hold on just a sec, the Five-Os are knocking at my door.

Yes Rainmaker said virtual meaning not totally. What you're describing is not here (yet).

Now Remember in Oceania all the citizens were under constant surveillance and fed fabricated news stories.


Better do a service inspection on your security system, RM. I think they're coming to get you as we speak.

I'm not the one that needs to worry, because when Trump's declared Emporer-God (after the next crisis) Rainmaker's already on record as a supporter from the get go.

You however are another story. And should probably be sleeping with your tinfoil hat on and a .357 snubnosed revolver in your butt hole. Nomsayin?

TJMAC77SP
11-16-2015, 11:24 PM
Yes Rainmaker said virtual meaning not totally. What you're describing is not here (yet).

Now Remember in Oceania all the citizens were under constant surveillance and fed fabricated news stories.



I'm not the one that needs to worry, because when Trump's declared Emporer-God (after the next crisis) Rainmaker's already on record as a supporter from the get go.

You however are another story. And should probably be sleeping with your tinfoil hat on and a .357 snubnosed revolver in your butt hole. Nomsayin?

RM, I swear sometimes reading your posts make my brain hurt. I need an adult beverage.

Keep it up though Bro. Mediocrity is found in the unoriginal. You are an original

garhkal
11-17-2015, 03:38 AM
He was a member of the Cristian nut-bag fringe of f the anti-abortion movement when he committed the attack, a "Christian"Movement that repeatedly encouraged and admired terrorist attacks within the US. Where did you get the socialist excuse from.

Remember When tiller was murdered and the fringe, all professing to be Christian, came out saying how justified that terrorist attack was?

Like i said, from the wiki ON the bombing.

As to Tiller, no i don't remember that incident. Give me a chance to look it up.


And yet, It didn't stop their turncoat Socialist Politicians from meeting their Syrian Refugee quota (even after Charlie Hebdo attacks, the foiled Paris train Attack and repeated reports for months that Europe was being bombarded with "ISIS" terrorists posing as refugees).

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/03/germany-france-eu-refugee-quotas-migration-crisis

This makes about as much sense as 19 hijackers from Saudi Arabia attack the world trade center and we respond by attacking Iraq and Turning America into a virtual Police State, while at the same time ignoring the Millions of Migrants pouring in through the unsecured southern border.

Those responsible for leaving the barn door open should be tried for treason by the French People and strung up by their nuts on the Champs-Elysees.

I agree. At least here in the US we have 24 state governors and some senators who are starting to use their noggins by sending that letter to Obama saying "we won't take them"..

Absinthe Anecdote
11-17-2015, 09:35 AM
Were there population pamphlets from the Institut Montaigne in the airport? You remember that figure or did you keep the pamphlet?

What am I attempting to be right about? That everyone in France would be happy to call the attacks on Friday Islamic Terrorism or that your citing their being a 'nation-state' is so fucking irrelevant as to be a joke?

You are right (at last), I do think I am right on both those points.

I'm loving your little witch hunt for Rusty's French pamphlet.

Seriously, I've done things like Rusty described before. Picked up a bit of obscure reading material and had factoids from it stick in my brain.

Especially on deployments, I was always hungry for something to read.

Rusty Jones
11-17-2015, 11:12 AM
Why would I offer any kind of argument to a point which is completely irrelevant to anything I posted. Would you like me to argue that vanilla is the best flavor ice cream as well?

You may as well. You can't even stick to the original point(s). Much like WJ5, when you fail at one you move on to another. For example:


This whole Islamic Terrorism label debacle is pure bullshit. Not that I think you would actually conduct a credible test but I would suggest to anyone who wants to waste any time on this stupidity ask the next 10 regular people you come in contact with if these attacks like occurred in Paris are Islamic Terrorism. Don't parse the question just ask it exactly as that. I guaran-fucking-tee you that you will get the same answer from all of them. "FUCK YES IT IS !"

How many times I have I told you that I'm personally not opposed to the label of "Islamic terrorism?" Yet, here you are continuing to insist that I am... and you're telling me that the next ten random people will "disagree" with me. Dude, how many times do I have to keep telling you that I'm not personally opposed?


No we aren't at war with Islam and that phrase doesn't come close to saying that. It only even enters that universe when you actually couch your wording to achieve that narrative. I am perfectly comfortable labeling the Olympic Bombing as Christian Terrorism (although it is a pretty thin comparison to the current events, for the sake of brevity, I'll go along with it). I never viewed the thousands of LEOs who searched the Smokey Mountains for Rudolph as at war with Christianity (equally thin but I didn't raise the comparison after all)

Great, I only brought up "Christian terrorism" just to see if you would do exactly what you did here: contrast Christian and Islamic terrorism, and speak of Christian terrorism in mitigating language. And sure enough, you didn't disappoint.


Fucking nation-states !! Who the fuck are you kidding? Or attempting to kid. This isn't an ethnic issue at all. It only becomes that again when the wording is couched to do so. Anyone who knows anything, any fucking thing at all about Islam knows that it is practiced by many ethnic groups so whether any country is a nation state or not is AGAIN fucking bullshit. You attempted to steer the thread to your own, borrowed and unoriginal narrative. Again, who the fuck are you kidding?

Just like I said earlier... you're now trying to prove another point, because you failed at proving a previous one. Did I bring up nation states to talk about the various ones in which Islam is practiced? Oh, and now you're throwing in "borrowed" and "unoriginal," you know, those two tired ass words out of your pathetically tiny little bag of tricks. Bitch, please. I don't know how many times I have to say it, but I brought up nation states to illustrate the point that they can get away with certain things that non nation states can't, and I used Hungary as an example.

Either you're trying to be too difficult, or maybe you're too stupid to grasp it - maybe both - I don't know, but either way... the whole nation state argument doesn't seem to be going anywhere, so this is the last time I'm going to mention it.

TJMAC77SP
11-17-2015, 12:31 PM
I don't know, but either way... the whole nation state argument doesn't seem to be going anywhere, so this is the last time I'm going to mention it.

Since you raised the argument to begin with I appreciate you dropping it.

TJMAC77SP
11-17-2015, 12:39 PM
I'm loving your little witch hunt for Rusty's French pamphlet.

Seriously, I've done things like Rusty described before. Picked up a bit of obscure reading material and had factoids from it stick in my brain.

Especially on deployments, I was always hungry for something to read.

Haven't we all. But what an iron-clad mind. Remembering an obscure statistic from an a pamphlet read almost 6 years ago. Myself personally, I would have googled for more current and citable statistics (which is what I did). But, hey, that's just me.

MikeKerriii
11-18-2015, 04:51 AM
Like i said, from the wiki ON the bombing.

As to Tiller, no i don't remember that incident. Give me a chance to look it up. You take info like that from Wiki without confirmation, that is as bflaky as my spelling, Why would a know associate of Christian terrorists groups suddenly decide to attack in support of another cause? Is there any real evidence he did?



I agree. At least here in the US we have 24 state governors and some senators who are starting to use their noggins by sending that letter to Obama saying "we won't take them".. An those letters are as effective as masturbation, guaranteed not to produce a viable result.

garhkal
11-18-2015, 06:48 PM
An those letters are as effective as masturbation, guaranteed not to produce a viable result.

With as often as Obama seems to have ignored the law, i agree. BUT at least they are showing they are willing to stand up for the citizens rather than illegals or refugees..

MikeKerriii
11-18-2015, 09:20 PM
With as often as Obama seems to have ignored the law, i agree. BUT at least they are showing they are willing to stand up for the citizens rather than illegals or refugees..

What does this have to do with ignoring the law? the Governor seem to be ignoring the simple fact that they have absolutely zero authority on this matter, They are just pretending to that it does make the rubes happy.They have as much authority here as the NFL does to define the strike zone in MLB. As I said nothing more than political masturbation and they can't even get that right

Rusty Jones
11-20-2015, 06:46 PM
Well, here you go! Trump just said "Islamic terrorism." To be honest with you, I thought he'd be the last candidate to actually say this. Surely, in his line of business, he has too much vested in the UAE and other rich Arab countries to want to piss anyone off over there. Either he's stupid, or he's a bit more complex than that...

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/260926-trump-muslim-database-was-reporters-idea

sandsjames
11-20-2015, 07:29 PM
Well, here you go! Trump just said "Islamic terrorism." To be honest with you, I thought he'd be the last candidate to actually say this. Surely, in his line of business, he has too much vested in the UAE and other rich Arab companies to want to piss anyone off over there. Either he's stupid, or he's a bit more complex than that...

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/260926-trump-muslim-database-was-reporters-idea

I think that, just like everything else PC, the people who actually get offended are people who aren't even part of a specific group, just people who are worried that someone else might actually take offense.

Rusty Jones
11-20-2015, 10:31 PM
I think that, just like everything else PC, the people who actually get offended are people who aren't even part of a specific group, just people who are worried that someone else might actually take offense.

Well, the article isn't about him saying "Islamic terrorism." I just noticed that he said it, and posted the article here.

But I know what you mean. For example, Mitt Romney's 47% speech. I doubt that it changed many people's minds that were going to vote for him. If that speech bothered you, then you weren't going to vote for him anyway.

The same applies in Trump's case. I don't think that it's so much that people outside of the group being attacked feel "offended," it's mostly that they feel they've got something to convert his supporters. And they'd be sadly mistaken.

garhkal
11-21-2015, 05:22 AM
What does this have to do with ignoring the law? the Governor seem to be ignoring the simple fact that they have absolutely zero authority on this matter, They are just pretending to that it does make the rubes happy.They have as much authority here as the NFL does to define the strike zone in MLB. As I said nothing more than political masturbation and they can't even get that right

How do you figure a state governor doesn't have the right to decide whether his or her state will accept refugees?

MikeKerriii
11-22-2015, 03:28 AM
How do you figure a state governor doesn't have the right to decide whether his or her state will accept refugees?
Come on this is Middle school civics level stuff, or failing that 30 seconds on Google

It is easy to figure out, The Federal Government is in charge immigration policy. The supremacy clause means when a clown of a governor tries to override Federal policy he gets slapped down.

Article I, Section 8, gives The Federal government the authority over these matters

The 14th Amendment dictates how people are to be treated within the US.

Where in your imagination does a Governor get the authority to override the president on a solely Federal matter? Congress can change the immigration laws the President is using, but a Governor has no more legal power to do so than any normal citizen does.

ACME_MAN
12-07-2015, 11:21 PM
It should be labelled for what it is . . . RADICAL islamic terrorism. I don't think we should lump in all muslims with the wackos, or should I say wahaabis.