42 Dead In US Jihad Attacks; Liberals Still Shout "Fear Mongering"

[JakeStarkey]

Macmuffin the mouse lord can have another piece of cheese.

We have 11000 gun deaths a year and 5 dead average from Muslim attacks a year here. Dylan Roof, the wild eyed racist love of evil, shot eight Christians in less than 90 seconds.

The OP has no balance or context.

None of the far right mouse lords have any sense of decency.

 

[Mac1958]

I'm is so far up in the heads of the PC Police here that I could post the freakin' alphabet and they'd go full tilt drama queen on me.

I really am The Man.

Seriously, I'm thinking about asking me for my autograph.


.

 

[JimBowie1958]

42 in 5 years, compared to 9,000 a year from home grown killers with guns. Hmmm... and the latter no one wants to do anything about on the right, but the former is a massive number, or something.

As compared to hundreds of thousands who died from cancer....any other irrelevant comparisons you care to make?

We are not talking about unavoidable accidents or deaths without preventable steps.

These 42 lives, on top of the thousands that died in New York are far more than we would have had die IF THE FUCKING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD JUST DO ITS GOD DAMNED JOB.

These are 42 POINTLESS DEATHS brought about by federal incompetence and liberal and dnecon duplicity so they can keep make windfall profits on cheap labor; and there is NOTHING MORE TO IT.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I'm is so far up in the heads of the PC Police here that I could post the freakin' alphabet and they'd go full tilt drama queen on me.

I really am The Man.

Seriously, I'm thinking about asking me for my autograph.


.

If the libtards are not going ape shit, then you are not really trying.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm is so far up in the heads of the PC Police here that I could post the freakin' alphabet and they'd go full tilt drama queen on me.

I really am The Man.

Seriously, I'm thinking about asking me for my autograph.


.

You claim not to attack innocent muslims, but you attacked them as 'disrespectful' for wanting a mosque in the vicinity of 9/11 ground zero.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I'm is so far up in the heads of the PC Police here that I could post the freakin' alphabet and they'd go full tilt drama queen on me.

I really am The Man.

Seriously, I'm thinking about asking me for my autograph.


.

You claim not to attack innocent muslims, but you attacked them as 'disrespectful' for wanting a mosque in the vicinity of 9/11 ground zero.

because verbal critiques are attacks just as much as flying an airplane into a sky scraper is, obviously

 

[JakeStarkey]

In addition to fear mongering, it also fails as a slippery slope fallacy, a composition fallacy, and is fundamental ignorance and bigotry.

No, it's a fallacy fallacy of the fallacy fallacy type fallacy fallacy... did I mention fallacy?

The last couple of pages (at least) on this thread has been the PC Police deflecting.

How do they think we're not doing to see it?
.

It seems to be his response to everything.... fallacy. It's like he learned a new word.

The far right uses fallacies all the time because they cannot discuss context or the nuance of subjects. They are ideologues. They don't think.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm is so far up in the heads of the PC Police here that I could post the freakin' alphabet and they'd go full tilt drama queen on me.

I really am The Man.

Seriously, I'm thinking about asking me for my autograph.


.

whoa, talk about drama queening...

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm is so far up in the heads of the PC Police here that I could post the freakin' alphabet and they'd go full tilt drama queen on me.

I really am The Man.

Seriously, I'm thinking about asking me for my autograph.


.

You claim not to attack innocent muslims, but you attacked them as 'disrespectful' for wanting a mosque in the vicinity of 9/11 ground zero.

because verbal critiques are attacks just as much as flying an airplane into a sky scraper is, obviously

Well, there's a bit of a new wrinkle. It's okay to attack innocent muslims, but only as long as it's verbal bigotry and attempting to deny them their 1st Amendment rights.

 

[gipper]

IMO we have much more to fear in Hillary starting WWIII...she is owned by the banksters and they love war. She has referred to Putin as Hitler.....

Irony...if Trump called him that, the MSM would scream warmonger and lefty dupes eat it up.

The banks would love WWIII? Now that I have never heard. IMHO, these banks with investments and loans all over the world would not be too happy to see them going up in a mushroom cloud.

You just admitted you are ignorant.

Nearly all our wars have been bankster wars. Who do you think finances wars? Sleeping Beauty!

You specifically referenced WWIII. A real world war at this point in history would almost certainly be a thermonuclear war with nine 9 nations with 15,000 nuclear weapons and several others on the verge of becoming a nuclear power. No, bankers and mega-corporation would not want to see a nuclear war which could be devastating to investments and world markets.

What many large corporations and banks do like is smaller contained wars with the outcome a certainty such as the Iraqi wars which increased defense spending will little risk of it spreading..

I do not agree. WWIII could just as well be non-nuclear, which is exactly what the State and the banksters would prefer...but nuking is not out of the question in their minds.

War is ALWAYS the health of the State.

One needs only look at what the neocons and neolibs have been doing to Russia. They don't seem too concerned about Russia's nukes. They instigated a coup in Ukraine and then blamed it on Putin...and millions of Americans believe the lies. They have placed NATO on Russia's border and performed war games there. I doubt we know the extent they have gone and will go to control Russia.

Whether war adds or subtracts from the bottom line of big businesses depend a lot on the business and to what extend war disrupts business activities. Limited wars that are well contained with a predicable outcome are certainly good for many businesses. However, a world war involving many nations is far less predictable.

Agreed. However I don't think the elites really care about predictability. They think they can always control the outcome to their benefit and avoid harm to themselves. A huge war like the previous world wars, benefited the elites greatly. They think they can do it again. If millions die, they may not want that, but that is not of great concern to them.

 

[NYcarbineer]

42 in 5 years, compared to 9,000 a year from home grown killers with guns. Hmmm... and the latter no one wants to do anything about on the right, but the former is a massive number, or something.

As compared to hundreds of thousands who died from cancer....any other irrelevant comparisons you care to make?

We are not talking about unavoidable accidents or deaths without preventable steps.

These 42 lives, on top of the thousands that died in New York are far more than we would have had die IF THE FUCKING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD JUST DO ITS GOD DAMNED JOB.

These are 42 POINTLESS DEATHS brought about by federal incompetence and liberal and dnecon duplicity so they can keep make windfall profits on cheap labor; and there is NOTHING MORE TO IT.

8 per year for the last 5 years is not World War III vs. Islamist extremists. There is no 'job' any government can do to reduce that number.

Three (or more) women, on average, in the US, are killed by their husbands or boyfriends,

per day.

Who would you people like to persecute over that? The husbands and boyfriends who don't kill women?

 

[MaryL]

Since 9/11, no reprisals, no anti muslin backlash. Muslims killed Christians in Pakistan on Easter day. Still, no backlash. Why are liberals so fixated on ANTI Muslim backlashes after 9/11? I wonder, who's side are liberals on after all is said and done?

You can't be serious.

Mocking questions don't make convincing arguments. Are you serious?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Since 9/11, no reprisals, no anti muslin backlash. Muslims killed Christians in Pakistan on Easter day. Still, no backlash. Why are liberals so fixated on ANTI Muslim backlashes after 9/11? I wonder, who's side are liberals on after all is said and done?

You can't be serious.

Mocking questions don't make convincing arguments. Are you serious?

You should have kept reading. I made the irrefutable argument.

 

[MaryL]

Since 9/11, no reprisals, no anti muslin backlash. Muslims killed Christians in Pakistan on Easter day. Still, no backlash. Why are liberals so fixated on ANTI Muslim backlashes after 9/11? I wonder, who's side are liberals on after all is said and done?

You can't be serious.

Mocking questions don't make convincing arguments. Are you serious?

You should have kept reading. I made the irrefutable argument.

Doesn't everyone, though? My turn to be snarky. Sorry. I will read them

 

[MaryL]

NYcarabineer: Where is your irrefutable proof? Not seeing it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

42 in 5 years, compared to 9,000 a year from home grown killers with guns. Hmmm... and the latter no one wants to do anything about on the right, but the former is a massive number, or something.

As compared to hundreds of thousands who died from cancer....any other irrelevant comparisons you care to make?

We are not talking about unavoidable accidents or deaths without preventable steps.

These 42 lives, on top of the thousands that died in New York are far more than we would have had die IF THE FUCKING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD JUST DO ITS GOD DAMNED JOB.

These are 42 POINTLESS DEATHS brought about by federal incompetence and liberal and dnecon duplicity so they can keep make windfall profits on cheap labor; and there is NOTHING MORE TO IT.

Look who is blaming da Boosh? Ha.

The irrelevancy is your cancer comparison.

You don't get nuance and context because you are, like Macmouselord, a concrete learner.

 

[MaryL]

I live in middle America. Muslims aren't a major threat to my existence now. But, damn, they chop off heads, they strap on suicide vests, stone people to death all to kill the INFIDEL. Who or what an Infidel IS, is in question, even Muslims can't agree. But us non Muslims are tired of the threats they pose. All Muslims have to take on the responsibility and own up to the evil they have done and at least try to stop the cycle of hate against the west and free thinkers.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

See? Suddenly, he's quiet as a mouse.

This may be a foreign concept to you, but some people actually work for a living.

I have my business to run, for instance

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Mass shootings: There were 372 mass shootings in the US in 2015, killing 475 people and wounding 1,870, according to the Mass Shooting Tracker, which catalogues such incidents. A mass shooting is defined as a single shooting incident which kills or injures four or more people, including the assailant.




Yes, let's focus on the smallest percent of crime because you're scared shitless. This is nothing compared to our overall problems.

 

[MaryL]

Islam wants to mandate sharia law in non Muslim countries. I am like WOW! The West tried that, it was called imperialism and largely condemned. Islam does it, DAMN. Now, it is acceptable? Really. They chop off heads and crash planes into buildings. The west is based on rational thinking, Islam manipulates rational thinking to their irrational advantage.